This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

EUROCODE 2 WORKED EXAMPLES

**Copyright: European Concrete Platform ASBL, May 2008.
**

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the European Concrete Platform ASBL. Published by the European Concrete Platform ASBL Editor: Jean-Pierre Jacobs 8 rue Volta 1050 Brussels, Belgium Layout & Printing by the European Concrete Platform All information in this document is deemed to be accurate by the European Concrete Platform ASBL at the time of going into press. It is given in good faith. Information on European Concrete Platform documents does not create any liability for its Members. While the goal is to keep this information timely and accurate, the European Concrete Platform ASBL cannot guarantee either. If errors are brought to its attention, they will be corrected. The opinions reflected in this document are those of the authors and the European Concrete Platform ASBL cannot be held liable for any view expressed therein. All advice or information from the European Concrete Platform ASBL is intended for those who will evaluate the significance and limitations of its contents and take responsibility for its use and application. No liability (including for negligence) for any loss resulting from such advice or information is accepted. Readers should note that all European Concrete Platform publications are subject to revision from time to time and therefore ensure that they are in possession of the latest version. This publication is based on the publication: "Guida all'uso dell'eurocodice 2" prepared by AICAP; the Italian Association for Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete, on behalf of the the Italian Cement Organziation AITEC, and on background documents prepared by the Eurocode 2 Project Teams Members, during the preparation of the EN version of Eurocode 2 (prof A.W. Beeby, prof H. Corres Peiretti, prof J. Walraven, prof B. Westerberg, prof R.V. Whitman). Authorization has been received or is pending from organisations or individuals for their specific contributions.

FOREWARD The introduction of Eurocodes is a challenge and opportunity for the European cement and concrete industry. These design codes, considered to be the most advanced in the world, will lead to a common understanding of the design principles for concrete structures for owners, operators and users, design engineers, contractors and the manufacturers of concrete products. The advantages of unified codes include the preparation of common design aids and software and the establishment of a common understanding of research and development needs in Europe. As with any new design code, it is important to have an understanding of the principles and background, as well as design aids to assist in the design process. The European cement and concrete industry represented by CEMBUREAU, BIBM and ERMCO recognised this need and set up a task group to prepare two documents, Commentary to EN 1992 and Worked Examples to EN 1992. The Commentary to EN 1992 captures te background to the code and Worked Examples to EN 1992 demonstrates the practical application of the code. Both the documents were prepared by a team led by Professor Giuseppe Mancini, Chairman of CEN TC 250/SC2 Concrete Structures, and peer reviewed by three eminent engineers who played a leading role in the development of the concrete Eurocode: Professor Narayanan, Professor Spehl and Professor Walraven. This is an excellent example of pan-European collaboration and BIBM, CEMBUREAU and ERMCO are delighted to make these authoritative documents available to design engineers, software developers and all others with an interest in promoting excellence in concrete design throughout Europe. As chairman of the Task Group, I would like to thank the authors, peer reviewers and members of the joint Task Force for working efficiently and effectively in producing these documents. Dr Pal Chana Chairman, CEMBUREAU/BIBM/ERMCO TF 5.5: Eurocodes

EFCA and ERMCO this publication should prove immensely valuable to designers in discovering the background to many of the code requirements. conditioned by the agreed format for Eurocodes. They are born out of an ambitious programme initiated by the European Union. Also EC 2 in common with other Eurocodes. might obscure the similarities to many national codes. They embody the collective experience and knowledge of whole of Europe. Eurocode 2 (EC 2) for concrete structures draws heavily on the CEB Model Code. Eurocodes reflect the results of research in material technology and structural behaviour in the last fifty years and they incorporate all modern trends in structural design. Worked examples further illustrate the application of the code and should promote understanding. The commentary will prove an authentic companion to EC 2 and deserves every success. BIBM. This is the backdrop to the publication of ‘Commentary and Worked Examples to EC 2’ by Professor Mancini and his colleagues. With a wealth of code writing experience in Europe. which offers tools for the design of economic and innovative concrete structures. Comparisons with the ENV stage of EC2 are also provided in a number of cases. The publication brings together many of the documents produced by the Project Team during the development of the code. it was possible to approach the task in a rational and logical manner. Commissioned by CEMBUREAU. The problems of coming to terms with a new set of codes by busy practising engineers cannot be underestimated.Attributable Foreword to the Commentary and Worked Examples to EC2 Eurocodes are one of the most advanced suite of structural codes in the world. The document is rich in theoretical explanations and draws on much recent research. This publication will assist in building confidence in the new code. And yet the presentation and terminology. Professor R S Narayanan Chairman CEN/TC 250/SC2 (2002 – 2005) . Like many current national codes in Europe. tends to be general in character and this might present difficulty to some designers at least initially. The chapter on EN 1990 (Basis of structural design) is an added bonus and will be appreciated by practioners.

practical rules can be given. another important condition applies. A code should be simple enough to be handled by practicing engineers without considerable problems. but resulting in more accurate and economic results. EFCA and ERMCO for their initiative. Finally I would like to thank CEMBURAU. I would like to thank my colleagues of the Project Team. Models with different degrees of complexity may be offered. or an existing code is updated. Hugo Corres and Konrad Zilch. because the input values can not be estimated with accuracy. like EC-2. cannot lead to very accurate results. BIBM. Codes should be transparent. For instance simple. a number of principles should be regarded: 1. 2. that the code is not prepared for those who make it. For writing a Eurocode. New developments should be recognized as much as possible. which means that it cannot be based on one certain theory. as such increasing the transparency. but not at the cost of too complex theoretical formulations. That means that the writers should be aware. that it should not be considered as finalized if implementation has not been taken care of. A code should be open-minded. 5. 4. A code may have different levels of sophistication. This book may. Bo Westerberg. serve as an essential and valuable contribution to this implementation. but not on the cost of significant concessions with regard to quality. 3. Also my colleague Giuseppe Mancini and his Italian team are gratefully acknowledged for providing a set of very illustrative and practical working examples.Foreword to Commentary to Eurocode 2 and Worked Examples When a new code is made. On the other hand simplicity should not lead to significant lack of accuracy. Joost Walraven Convenor of Project Team for EC2 (1998 -2002) . A lot of effort was invested to achieve all those goals. but for those who will use it. Often socalled “accurate” formulations. Here the word “accuracy” should be well understood. It is important that this background information is well documented and practically available. It contains extensive background information on the recommendations and rules found in EC2. 6. leading to conservative and robust designs. Codes should be based on clear and scientifically well founded theories. corresponding to a good representation of the structural behaviour and of the material physics. especially Robin Whittle. consistent and coherent. support and advice to bring out this publication. excluding others. for helping in getting together all background information. International consensus had to be reached. derived by scientists. It is a rule for every project. As an alternative more detailed design rules may be offered. consuming more calculation time. further to courses and trainings on a national and international level.

............................. 6-10 EXAMPLE 6..............................................................................4B – THE SAME ABOVE........3.................................. 6-1 EXAMPLE 6.....................................................................4] ................... WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES ........... ULS COMBINATION OF ACTION OF A RESIDENTIAL CONCRETE FRAMED BUILDING [EC2 – CLAUSE 2......C FOR A PRESTRESSED BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6.................................................................. 2-9 SECTION 4...................... 4-1 EXAMPLE 4................................. 6-1 EXAMPLE 6............................... 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.............................WORKED EXAMPLES ........................................................3] ........ WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY ............. 6-5 EXAMPLE 6....5................................................................................................. 6-7 EXAMPLE 6..........................................2] ..................3 [EC2 CLAUSE 4.. 6-3 EXAMPLE 6....2] ..2 (CONCRETE C90/105) [EC2 CLAUSE 6............................ ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CONTINUOUS BEAM [EC2 – CLAUSE 2...........................3]. 2-4 EXAMPLE 2................... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CANOPY [EC2 – CLAUSE 2...7 SHEAR – TORSION INTERACTION DIAGRAMS [EC2 CLAUSE 6...................... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS ON A REINFORCED CONCRETE RETAINING WALL [EC2 – CLAUSE 2.......................................... 2-2 EXAMPLE 2............................................................................1................... WALL BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6........2...................................................... 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.....................1 (CONCRETE C30/37) [EC2 CLAUSE 6...............2 [EC2 CLAUSE 4.............................................5 [EC2 CLAUSE 6....................................................6 [EC2 CLAUSE 6............. CONCRETE RETAINING WALL: GLOBAL STABILITY AND GROUND RESISTANCE VERIFICATIONS [EC2 – CLAUSE 2................................. [EC2 CLAUSE 6................. 4-1 EXAMPLE 4......................... WITH STEEL S500C fyd = 435 MPA........................................4] ..................................................................1 [EC2 CLAUSE 4....8............................. 4-4 SECTION 6..................................................2] .................................................................................. 2-1 EXAMPLE 2........... 2-6 EXAMPLE 2.......4...........................................5]......................4] .........................................SUMMARY SECTION 2...1] ......................................................................... 2-1 EXAMPLE 2....1] ....... WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN .............4] ...........2] ...................................................................4] ..........4 DETERMINATION OF SHEAR RESISTANCE GIVEN THE SECTION GEOMETRY AND MECHANICS [EC2 CLAUSE 6............... 6-15 Table of Content ..........3 CALCULATION OF VRD.................4] ....... 6-4 EXAMPLE 6.....................................................EC2 – worked examples summary EUROCODE 2 .......................4] ..4].................................................................... 6-12 EXAMPLE 6...................

......5] ............ a<Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6....................................................3...................................................2 – 7......1 [EC2 CLAUSE 11.........5] ..................3... A>Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6...................... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7........................... LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES..3... DESIGN FORMULAS DERIVATION FOR THE CRACKING LIMIT STATE [EC2 CLAUSE 7................. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES ................2 [EC2 CLAUSE 11.................................5] ....................2 APPROXIMATED METHOD ........................................................................................................................ 6-28 EXAMPLE 6......................................... 7-8 EXAMPLE 7........... 6-24 EXAMPLE 6.......................5 – 11........5 APPLICATION OF THE APPROXIMATED METHOD [EC2 CLAUSE 7...................4] ....3.... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7.............................4 – 11..........................................2] ....................................................2] ..............4] ...........................2] . 6-38 EXAMPLE 6..........4....2 – 7..............................13 VARIABLE HEIGHT BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6...................3....10 THICK CANTILEVER BEAM.......................3.. 7-10 5B7............EC2 – worked examples summary EXAMPLE 6.......... [EC2 CLAUSE 5.........2 DESIGN OF MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT [EC2 CLAUSE 7..............................1 – 11.............................................................3 EVALUATION OF CRACK AMPLITUDE [EC2 CLAUSE 7............................12 PILE CAP [EC2 CLAUSE 6.............4] ..............5].............14.....3............................... 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.5] ........................9........................6] . 3500 KN CONCENTRATED LOAD [EC2 CLAUSE 6.............11 GERBER BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6..................... 7-18 SECTION 11............................6 VERIFICATION OF LIMIT STATE OF DEFORMATION ...................4......4] .. 7-11 EXAMPLE 7........... THICK SHORT CORBEL........ 11-1 EXAMPLE 11..15 SLABS.........1 – 11...... 6-21 EXAMPLE 6.... 6-40 SECTION 7.........................10 – 6..................................................... 6-18 EXAMPLE 6...................3 – 7........................................... 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.......................5] ................................................................6 – 11. 7-5 EXAMPLE 7.......1 EVALUATION OF SERVICE STRESSES [EC2 CLAUSE 7......................... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11............. 11-3 Table of Content .................1 – 6.......................

is the same for all spans: γG = 1. STR – Bending moment verification at mid span (Set B) Unlike in the verification of static equilibrium. 2. 2. a single characteristic value is taken for self-weight and permanent imposed load.4] A continuous beam on four bearings is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Service imposed load Qk1 Note. WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN EXAMPLE 2.2.35 (Fig.EC2 – worked examples 2-1 SECTION 2. Load combination for verification of holding down devices at the end bearings. Fig. 2.1. as indicated in Fig. In this example and in the following ones. Table of Content . respectively Gk1 and Gk2. because of their small variability.1.1. Fig. 2. ULS combinations of actions for a continuous beam [EC2 – clause 2. the partial safety factor for permanent loads in the verification of bending moment in the middle of the central span. EQU – Static equilibrium (Set A) Factors of Set A should be used in the verification of holding down devices for the uplift of bearings at end span.2). Load combination for verification of bending moment in the BC span.

35) for all spans. and only on half of it for the verification of bending with axial force. 2.2. ULS combinations of actions for a canopy [EC2 – clause 2. as in Fig. 2. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 2-2 EXAMPLE 2.3.3. Load combination for verification of static equilibrium. Fig. STR – Verification of resistance of a column(Set B) The partial factor to be taken for permanent loads in the verification of maximum compression stresses and of bending with axial force in the column is the same (γG = 1. The variable imposed load is distributed over the full length of the canopy in the first case.4] The canopy is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Snow imposed load Qk1 EQU – Static equilibrium (Set A) Factors to be taken for the verification of overturning are those of Set A.

Fig. Load combination for the compression stresses verification of the column. 2. 2.EC2 – worked examples 2-3 Fig.5.4. Load combination for the verification of bending with axial force of the column. Table of Content .

6.w Fig.w 0.w) = 1.es + 0.5·Qk. ULS combination of action .n (for sites under 1000 m a. d) service load predominant.6.6 Fk.w + 0.n + 1. Table of Content . 2.n + 0.1.B.Variable actions are listed in table 2.n 0. b) Wind predominant.5·( Fk. 6. The values of partial factors are those recommended by EN1990.1.35·Gk + 1.5·(Qk.w Predominant action: service load (fig. a) 1.0·Gk + 1.es + 0.3.75· Qk.n + 0.7·Qk.EC2 – worked examples 2-4 EXAMPLE 2.7 Qk.5·Qk.5· Fk. d) 1.10-EN1990) Predominant action: wind favourable vertical loads (fig. 2. Table 2.l.9·Fk.es Predominant action: snow (fig.35·Gk + 1.es + 0.es) = 1.6.es Variable actions snow on roofing Qk.n + 0.5·Fk.w + 0.5·Qk.es + 0. 2. 2.n + 1. c) 1. Characteristic value Qk Combination value ψ0 Qk serviceability imposed load Qk.7·Qk.6·Fk. but they may be defined in the National Annex. b) 1.6.5·( Qk.STR (Set B) (eq.4] The permanent imposed load is indicated as Gk. c) Snow load predominant.es 0.5 Qk.35·Gk + 1. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure (Set B): a) Wind predominant.5·Qk.35·Gk + 1.35·Gk + 1.n + 0.w unfavourable vertical loads (fig.6.05·Qk.) wind Fk.05·Qk. 2.75·Qk. unfavourable vertical loads.residential concrete framed building [EC2 – clause 2.6·Fk.w) = 1.9·Fk.s.w N.35·Gk + 1. favourable vertical loads. Variable actions on a residential concrete building. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure .

b) 1.0·Gk + 1.es + 0.7. and by Set B for the verification of the concrete structural elements of the foundation. the basic combinations of actions for all the three approaches provided by EN1990 are given below.es = 1.65· Qk. d) 1.7·Qk. or on the structure.n + 0.es Predominant action: snow (fig. 6.3·Qk.16.7.5·Qk.3·0. c) 1. Approach 1 The design values of Set C and Set B of geotechnical actions and of all other actions from the structure.w = 1.15 and 2.0·Gk + 1.0·Gk + 1.7. the approach to be used is chosen in the National Annex.w Predominant action: wind (unfavourable vertical loads) (fig. 2.w Predominant action: service load (fig.3·0.0·Gk + 1.3·0.n + 0. c) Snow load predominant.w + 0.3· Fk.78·Fk.0·Gk + 1. For completeness and in order to clarify what is indicated in Tables 2. b) Wind predominant.3·0.6·Fk.w Fig.7·Qk. Set C (geotechnical verifications) Predominant action: wind (favourable vertical loads) (fig.3·0.es + 1. Basic combinations for the verification of the foundations (Set C): a) Wind predominant.w = 1.6·Fk. favourable vertical loads.3·Qk.3· Fk.3·Qk.n + 0.w + 1.n + 1. 2.3·0.65·Qk.0·Gk + 1.n + 1. Table of Content . 2.n + 1.91·Qk.3· Fk. 2. 2.10-EN1990] EN1990 allows for three different approaches.3·Qk.7. are applied in separate calculations.0·Gk + 1.5·Qk.7. Heavier values are usually given by Set C for the geotechnical verifications (ground resistance verification). d) service load predominant. a) 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-5 Basic combinations for the verification of foundations and ground resistance – STR/GEO [eq.es + 0.91·Qk. unfavourable vertical loads.78·Fk.es + 1.

9).n + 1. i.w 1.05·Qk.8.sovr Fig.35·Gk + 1. 2.9·Fk.5· Fk. 2.(static equilibrium of rigid body: verification of global stability to heave and sliding) (Set A) Only that part of the embankment beyond the foundation footing is considered for the verification of global stability to heave and sliding (Fig.9·(Gk.35·Gk + 1.n + 0. Actions for EQU ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete Table of Content . can be referred to Set B. to approach 2.75·Qk.75·Qk.w 1. This case.es 1. EXAMPLE 2.terr) + 1.0·Gk + 1.9.5·Qk.e. as geotechnical actions are not present. Set B) are used.4.n + 1. Actions on a retaining wall in reinforced concrete EQU . ULS combinations of actions on a reinforced concrete retaining wall [EC2 – clause 2.es + 0. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.w Approach 2 The same combinations used for the superstructure (i.05·Qk.4] Fig.e.5·Qk.9·Fk.wall + Gk.terr + 0.EC2 – worked examples 2-6 Set B (verification of concrete structural elements of foundations) 1.35·Gk + 1.5·Sk.1·Sk.w + 0. 1. 2.5·Qk.es + 0.

5·Qk. Possible load cases of surcharge on the embankment.0·Gk. The following figures show loads in relation to the combinations obtained with Set B partial safety factors. with surcharge acting on the whole surface of embankment.35·Sk.terr + 1.5·Sk. Set C 1.wall + 1.terr + 1.sovr + 1.terr + 1.35·Gk.wall + 1.35·Sk.0·Gk.35·Sk.3·Sk.sovr 1.sovr Set B 1.sovr 1.sovr Note: For all the above-listed combinations.terr + 1. are given below. or that it acts on the whole surface of the embankment (Fig. Fig. only cases in relation with case b).0·Gk.(ground pressure and verification of resistance of wall and footing) Approach 1 Design values from Set C and from Set B are applied in separate calculations to the geotechnical actions and to all other actions from the structure or on the structure.terr + 1. 2.sovr 1.wall + 1.terr + 1.35·Gk. For brevity.0·Gk. 2. Table of Content .terr + 1.5·Sk.5·Sk. i.sovr + 1.5·Qk.5·Qk.35·Gk.wall + 1.10a).terr + 1.0·Gk.sovr + 1.10b).10.terr + 1.sovr + 1.0·Gk. 2.35·Gk.35·Sk.e.terr + 1.0·Sk.EC2 – worked examples 2-7 STR/GEO .wall + 1.5·Sk.5·Qk. two possibilities must be considered: either that the surcharge concerns only the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing (Fig.

Table of Content . 2.EC2 – worked examples 2-8 Fig.11. Actions for GEO/STR ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete.

35·Gk. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.foot = 18.terr + 1.73 kN/m surcharge horizontal force: Sk.foot = 0.3·Qk.3·Qk.terr + 1.3·Sk. EXAMPLE 2.50 ⋅ 25 = 18.surch = 9.sovr + 1.sovr 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-9 Approach 2 Set B is used.ground = 26. active earth pressure: wall-ground interface friction angle: self-weight of wall: self-weight of footing: γ=18 kN/m3 φ=30° Ka = 0.12.sovr + 1.35·Gk.5.sovr + 1.3·Qk.terr + 1.0·Sk.75 + 31. Fig.0·Gk.0·Sk.25 = 50 kN/m self weight of ground above footing: Gk.wall = 0.35·Gk.50 ⋅ 1.0·Gk.wall + 1.3·Qk.sovr 1.0·Gk.terr + 1.3·Sk.35·Gk.wall = Pk.33 δ=0° Pk.0·Sk. weight density: angle of shearing resistance: factor of horiz.sovr + 1.terr + 1.0·Gk.ground = 18 ⋅ 2.wall + 1.3·Sk.30 ⋅ 2.wall + Pk.terr + 1.sovr 1.70 = 76. 1.sovr A numeric example is given below.50 ⋅ 25 = 31.5 kN/m surcharge on embankment: Qk.50 ⋅ 2. 2. Concrete retaining wall: global stability and ground resistance verifications [EC2 – clause 2.75 kN/m Pk.4] The assumption is initially made that the surcharge acts only on the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing.wall + 1.25 kN/m Gk.terr + 1.surch =10 kN/m2 ground horizontal force: Sk.0·Sk.terr + 1.3·Sk.wall + 1.9 kN/m Table of Content .Wall dimensions and actions on the wall (surcharge outside the foundation footing).

sovr Table of Content .60 = 159.57⋅31. Set B if partial factors.90 = 14. By taking 1.09 Contact pressure on ground Approach 2.terr + 1.28 = 51.16 kNm/m Mstab.9): moment footing self-weight (γG=0.9⋅(18. is used.9⋅(76.terr + 1.57⋅18.35·Sk.9⋅(0.5·Qk.terr + 1.25⋅1.terr + 1.9): resistant force: Fstab = 9.35·Sk.57⋅76.68 kNm/m stabilizing moment Mstab.24 kN/m ground self-weight (γG=0.sovr + 1.5): MS.5·Qk.0·Gk.wall + 1. i.EC2 – worked examples 2-10 Verification to failure by sliding Slide force Ground horizontal force (γG=1.surch = 1.sovr third combination 1.sovr + 1.5): Ssur = 1.35·Sk.73/51.9): Fstab.00/3) = 29.wall = 0.ground = 0.5·Sk.9⋅(0.40 + 22.90 ⋅ 1.wall + 1.24 = 64.e.5 ⋅ (9.40 + 14.73= 29.466 Verification to Overturning overturning moment moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.35 as the partial factors for the self-weight of the wall and of the ground above the foundation footing respectively. we obtain four different combinations as seen above: first combination 1.0 and 1.0·Gk.wall = 0.75) = 9.1): MS.9): Mstab.25 = 1.5·Sk.foot = 0.sovr + 1.35·Gk.1 ⋅ 26.35·Gk.60 kNm/m moment ground self-weight (γG=0.5·Sk.50) = 22.1⋅(26.16 + 113.97 + 35.73 kNm/m safety factor to global stability FS = Mstab/Mrib = 159.5·Qk.40 kN/m Surcharge horizontal (γQ=1.35·Gk.97 kNm/m moment wall self-weight (γG=0.5) = 39.9): Fstab.ground = 1.sovr second combination 1.terr + 1.9⋅(31.25) = 35.25) = 16.25 kN/m Resistant force (in the assumption of ground-flooring friction factor = 0.03 kNm/m Fstab.40 kNm/m moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.85 kN/m Sliding force: Fslide = 29.75⋅0.1): Sground = 1.9⋅(0.foot = 0.28 kNm/m overturning moment: Mrib = 29.65) = 10.62 kN/m footing self-weight (γG=0.65) = 113.ground = 0.85 = 44.wall + 1.9): stabilizing moment: Mstab = 10.0·Gk.89 kN/m The safety factor for sliding is: FS = Fstab / Frib = 64.73⋅3.89 / 44.68 = 3.62 + 16.terr + 1.5 ⋅ 9.57) wall self-weight (γG=0.03 + 39.5⋅1.

0): Pwall = 1. the values given at Table 2.EC2 – worked examples 2-11 fourth combination 1.35·Sk.35): moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.sovr = 1.67 cm Max pressure on ground σ = Ptot / 2.50) = 22.0): Ground self-weight (γG=1.25) =31.73⋅3.60) = 11.terr = 1.90⋅1. 2. the possibility that the surcharge acts on the whole embankment surface must be also considered.0 ⋅ (31. centre of mass of the footing moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.35·Gk.0 ⋅ (18.13.5 = 126.e.5 = 0.50/6 = 41.25 + 76. Dimensions of the retaining wall of the numeric example with surcharge on the whole embankment.502 = 88. For the verification of the contact pressure.sovr + 1.0 ⋅ (76.25 kNm/m Mfoot = 0 kNm/m Mground = .13).5·Qk.0⋅(76.5⋅(9.3 are obtained by repeating the calculation for this situation.0): moment from ground self-weight (γG=1.terr + 1. Fig.75) = 18.2 are obtained by repeating the calculation for the three remaining combinations of partial factors.25 – 30.28 + 11.0): for the first of the fourth above-mentioned MS.01 kNm/m Vertical load Wall self-weight (γG=1.35⋅(26.wall + 1.5 kN/m Eccentricity e = Mtot / Ptot = 39.28 kNm/m Mwall = 1. as follows: moment vs.1.75 kNm/m Pfoot = 1. i.0⋅(18. for the one in which the wall self-weight and the self-weight of the ground above the footing are both multiplied by 1.6 = 39.088 MPa The results given at Table 2.6 kNm/m Total moment Mtot = 36.08 + 22. (Fig.5·Sk.31 m ≤ B/6 = 2.0·Gk.0): Pground = 1.40) = .5 kNm/m Total load Ptot = 18.05 kN/m2 = 0.35.00/3)=36.5⋅0.75 + 31.5) = 76. The maximal pressure on ground is achieved with the second combination. Table of Content .01 / 126.25 kNm/m Footing self-weight (γG=1.30.75 ⋅ 0. combinations.terr + 1.sovr the contact pressure on ground is calculated. 2.0): moment from footing self-weight (γG=1.5): moment from wall self-weight (γG=1.08 kNm/m MS.50 + Mtot ⋅ 6 / 2.

5) (γQ=1. first second 36.0) -30.28 (γG=1.35) 42. The max pressure on ground is achieved once again for the second combination and its value is here higher than the one calculated in the previous scheme.35) -10.78 0.18 and here highlighted in bold.46 22.5) 32.35) 22.35) 25.35) 42.89 fourth 36.25 (γG=1.0) (γG=1.60 -41.35) 22.25 (γG=1.35) 42.19 (γG=1.5) 152.19 (γG=1.24 25.31 (γG=1.83 Table 2.35) 22.31 (γG=1.26 third 36.0) 31.19 88.0) 31.30 98.25 (γG=1.75 25.19 (γG=1. 5) (γQ=1.5) 15.08 (γQ=1.20 (γQ=1.20 -10.0) 31.75 (γG=1.0) (γG=1.08 (γQ=1.75 (γG=1.28 22.0) 31.78 0.2.28 22.0) 144 0.28 (γG=1. not present in Table 1.28 22.31 -41.5) 196.31 (γG=1.31 88.67 18.28 (γG=1.95 25.28 (γQ=1.50 (γG=1.10 88.50 (γQ=1.35) 153.0) (γG=1.50 (γG=1.35) 76. Max pressure for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.35) (γG=1.5) (γQ=1.10 18.75 (γG=1.75 (γG=1.31 (γG=1. 5) 178.19 (γG=1.0) -41.5) 169.50 0.5) 11.18 88.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) (surcharge on the whole foundation footing).20 (γQ=1.0) 103.5) 11.0) 76.35) 103.0) 76.81 18.60 (γG=1.28 0.5) 11.19 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.08 (γQ=1.0) -10.19 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1.08 (γQ=1.35) 25.5) (γQ=1. Table of Content .50 0.28 0.EC2 – worked examples 2-12 Table 2.5) 15.08 36.35) (γG=1.60 (γG=1.28 (γQ=1.0) (γG=1.35) 42.35) 22.50 (γQ=1.50 (γG=1.35) -30.35) (γQ=1.31 (γG=1.50 (γG=1.35) 103.25 15.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) Mtot (kNm/m) Pwall (kN/m) Pfoot (kN/m) Pground (kN/m) Ptot (kN/m) eccentricity (m) pressure on ground (kN/m2) (surcharge outside the foundation footing).28 (γG=1.5) (γQ=1.35) 28.48 fourth 36.25 (γG=1.0) 126.05 32.35) 22.19 11.0) 103.01 18.24 Msurch (kNm/m) Mtot (kNm/m) Pwall (kN/m) Pfoot (kN/m) Pterr (kN/m) Psurch (kN/m) Ptot (kN/m) eccentricity (m) pressure on ground (kN/m2) The two additional lines.ground (kNm/m) MS.35) 39.35) (γQ=1.30 18.11 99.08 36. 5) 28.0) 25.19 (γG=1.0) 25.20 -10.35) 170.19 99.31 (γG=1.08 36.28 (γQ=1.50 (γQ=1.50 (γQ=1.08 (γQ=1.28 (γQ=1.28 (γQ=1.25 (γG=1.35) -30.60 -41. Max pressure on ground for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS. first second third 36. correspond to the moment and to the vertical load resulting from the surcharge above the footing.35) 76.04 25.19 99.25 15.3.0) 42.35) -30.0 0.31 (γG=1.ground (kNm/m) MS.

4] Design the concrete cover of a reinforced concrete beam with exposure class XC1. Refer to figure 4. 10 mm) = 15 mm Table of Content .1 [EC2 clause 4.add = 0 . cmin.1 From table E. the reference (min. the concrete cover for the stirrups is calculated.dur = 15 mm Moreover: Δcdur.γ .) concrete strength class for exposure class XC1 is C20/25. Normal quality control is put in place. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm.st = 0 . The structural class is S4.b = 8 mm We obtain from table 4. Fig.γ = 0 .b.EC2 we see that. 10 mm) = max (8.1N .Δcdur. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY EXAMPLE 4.add. The max aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm). First. Bottom longitudinal bars are 5 φ 20. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. the resistance class adopted (C25/30) is suitable as it is higher than the reference strength class.EC2 – worked examples 4-1 SECTION 4.1. Δcdur.dur + Δcdur.4N . in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. From relation (3.2): cmin = max (cmin.st . With: cmin.EC2: cmin. 4. Δcdur.Δcdur. The concrete in use has resistance class C25/30.

We obtain from table 4. If we now calculate now the concrete cover for longitudinal reinforcement bars. Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. we have: c min.EC2: c min.4N . Table of Content . Δcdur. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. We obtain from relation (3.1): c nom = 20 + 10 = 30 mm . The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”.dur = 15 mm . In this case. From relation (3. 10 mm) = 20 mm .EC2 – Worked examples 4-2 Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. γ = 0 .add = 0 .b = 20 mm. Δcdur.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 15 + 10 = 25 mm . Moreover: Δc dur. We obtain from relation (3.2): c min = max (20.st = 0 . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 25 + 8 = 33 mm .

EC2 we find that. From table E. Table of Content . A normal quality control is put in place. Fig. In this case.4] Design the concrete cover for a reinforced concrete beam placed outside a residential building situated close to the coast.1. for the longitudinal bars: c nom = 45 mm . the reference (min.2 [EC2 clause 4. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”.2 In accordance with what has been stated in example 3. Refer to figure 3. We originally assume concrete with strength class C25/30. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm . The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).dur = 35 mm .) concrete strength class for exposure class XS1 is C30/37. we design the minimum concrete cover with reference to both the stirrups and the longitudinal bars. The exposure class is XS1. 4. the concrete strength class must therefore be increased from the originally assumed C25/30 to C30/37.EC2 – worked examples 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.1N . The structural class is S4 We obtain ( c min.2. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. The longitudinal reinforcement bars are 5 φ 20. even if the actions on concrete were compatible with strength class C25/30. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. Δcdev = 10 mm): for the stirrups: c nom = 45 mm . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 45 + 8 = 53 mm .

add . We use concrete with strength class C45/55. At the lower side of the two ribbings of the TT element we have: − longitudinal φ 12 reinforcement bars. strength class C45/55 is therefore adequate. The design working life of the structure is 50 years.b = 8 mm .dur = 25 mm .3N: − the structural class is reduced by 1 as the concrete used (C45/55) is of strength class higher than C40/50. the minimum concrete strength class is C30/37.2): c min = max (c min. Table of Content . An accurate quality control of concrete production is put in place.b . 10 mm) = 25 mm . We have: c min.EC2 – Worked examples 4-4 EXAMPLE 4. γ = 0 .dur + Δc dur. γ − Δc dur. The original structural class is S4. Moreover: Δc dur.add = 0 . Δcdur. Calculating first the concrete cover for stirrups.1N .st − Δc dur.4N . The exposure class is XS1. 25 + 0 – 0 – 0. In accordance with table 4. − strands φ 0.3. We find out from table E.5” .4] Calculate the concrete cover of a TT precast element.EC2 that for exposure class XS1.EC2: c min. 10 mm ) = = max (8. We obtain from table 4. − φ 8 stirrups at 100 mm . The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 16 mm. made of prestressed reinforced concrete.3 [EC2 clause 4. placed outside an industrial building situated close to the coast. c min. From relation (3.st = 0 . Refer to figure 3. Δcdur. − the structural class is reduced by 1 as special quality control of the concrete production is ensured We then refer to structural class S2.

Note that for the ordinary reinforcement bars.dur = 25 mm . In this case.st = 0 . the concrete cover for stirrups is “dominant”. Δcdur. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 30 + 8 = 38 mm .3 Calculating now the concrete cover for strands. Δcdur. We obtain from relation (3. c min.add . 10 mm ) = = max (12. 10 mm) = 25 mm . We obtain from table 4. 25 + 0 – 0 – 0.add = 0 . Moreover: Δc dur. We obtain from relation (3.EC2 – worked examples 4-5 Considering that the TT element is cast under procedures subjected to a highly efficient quality control. From relation (3.2): c min = max (c min. 4.4N .b = 12 mm . Table of Content .EC2: c min. γ − Δc dur. We have: c min.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm .b .1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm .st − Δc dur. Calculating now the concrete cover for longitudinal bars. Fig. γ = 0 . the value of Δcdev can be taken as 5 mm.dur + Δc dur. in which the concrete cover length is also assessed.

10 mm) = 35 mm .2): c min = max (18. Δcdur.dur = 35 mm . From relation (3. From relation (3.st = 0 .EC2 – Worked examples 4-6 We have: c min.8 mm .b = 1. The concrete cover for the lower strands of the TT element (one for each ribbing) is therefore equal to 43mm. Moreover: Δcdev = 5 mm .add = 0 . Δcdur.8. γ = 0 .EC2: c min. 35 + 0 – 0 – 0.5 = 18. The first strand’s axis is placed at 50mm from the lower end of the ribbing of the TT element.1): c nom = 35 + 5 = 40 mm .5N . Moreover: Δc dur.5 · 12. Table of Content . We obtain from table 4.

8·500·113.0 541.max = 2821. β1 and β2 factors and x1.2 kNm goes alongside it.1 Geometrical data and Possible strain distributions at the ultimate limit states Table 6. EXAMPLE 6.1] Geometrical data: b= 500 mm. The maximum moment resistance MRd.0·17·10-3 = 4134 kN.EC2 – worked examples 6-1 SECTION 6. Fig.1 Material data. d = 950 mm.5 First the NRd values corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section are calculated. β2 is the “position factor”. NRd1 = 0.5 203. NRd3 = 0.8·500·608.40 0.56 β2 0.35 x1 (mm) 113.1 6. d' = 50 mm. Steel and concrete resistance. h = 1000 mm. Basis: β1 means the ratio between the area of the parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc and the area of rectangle at the same deformation. which is used in southern Europe and generally in seismic areas. In particular the examples are developed using S450 steel with ductility grade C.5·17·10-3 = 772 kN NRd2 = 0. WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES GENERAL NOTE: Eurocode 2 permits to use a various steel yielding grades ranging from 400 MPa to 600 MPa.1 (Concrete C30/37) [EC2 clause 6.8·500·950·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 6460 + 1955 = 8415 kN NRd4 = 0.1.80 0. β1 and β2 factors and neutral axis depth. Some example is developed using S500 too. Example 6.2 fyk (MPa) 450 450 fyd (MPa) 391 391 fck (MPa) 30 90 fcd (MPa) 17 51 β1 0. the ratio between the distance of the resultant of parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc from εc and the deformation εc itself. 6.0 x2 (mm) 608.8·500·1000·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 8500 + 3910 = 12410 kN 6-1 . x2 values are shown in table 6.

80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ Developing.EC2 – worked examples 6-2 MRd3 must also be known. depth of neutral axis.2.26 0. 52m 5000 Table of Content . it results: x2 + 66.4·950) ·10-3 = 1655 kNm Subsequently.91x – 488970 = 0 which is satisfied for x = 666 mm ⎛ 950 ⎞ The stress in the lower reinforcement is: σs = 0.2. Their values are shown in Table 6. The equation of equilibrium to shifting for determination of x is written: ⎛ 5000000 − 5000 ⋅ 391 − 5000 ⋅ 0. the neutral axis x.80·666·500·17·(500 – 0.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⋅ 950 ⎞ x2 − ⎜ ⎟x −⎜ ⎟=0 0. NEd (kN) X (m) MRd (kNm) e (m) 600 2000 5000 10000 0.10 As an example the calculation related to NEd = 5000 kN is shown. Example 1: values of axial force. This results: MRd3 = 6460·(500 – 0. Ed Table 6. for a chosen value of NEd in each interval between two following values of NRd written above and one smaller than NRd1.666 virtual neutral axis 2031 2524 2606 1000 3.40 666) = 2606·106 Nmm = 2606 kNm and the eccentricity e = 2606 = 0.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⎞ ⎛ 0.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 0.105 0. eccentricity. MRd. moment resistance.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ ⎜ − 1 ⎟ = 297N / mm 2 666 ⎝ ⎠ The moment resistance is: MRd = 5000·391·(500-50) + 5000·297·(500-50) + 0.38 1.52 0. and the eccentricity M Rd e = N are calculated.294 0.

EC2 – worked examples 6-3 EXAMPLE 6.619 virtual neutral axis MRd (kNm) 4194 5403 5514 2702 e (m) 2.max = 6948.14 Table of Content .80 1.50. Values of NRd corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section and of MRd3: NRd1 = 2899 kN NRd2 = 7732 kN. The results are shown in Table 6.2 (Concrete C90/105) [EC2 clause 6. eccentricity NEd (kN) 1500 5000 10000 19000 x (m) 0.142 0. MRd.5 – 0. MRd and the eccentricity e were calculated for the chosen values of NEd .1.350 0.1] For geometrical and mechanical data refer to example 6.08 0.3 Values of axial load.7 kNm is associated to it. depth of neutral axis. NRd3 = 13566 + 3910 = 17476 kN NRd4 = 14280 + 7820 = 22100 kN MRd3 = 13566 (0.619) + 3910·(0.35·0.05) = 4031 kNm Applying the explained procedure x.0.55 0.3 Table 6. moment resistance.

3 Calculation of VRd. It results: VRd.5/1.626 + 0. 66 ⋅ 5.08 kN Non-cracked sections subjected to bending moment.5= 1.626 and k1 = 0. Average prestressing σcp = 5. VRd.c = (1.66 MPa Cracked sections subjected to bending moment.66 )2 + 1.15⋅5.2] Rectangular section bw = 100 mm.c for a prestressed beam [EC2 clause 6.0)⋅100⋅175 = 24.0 MPa.0 = 44.EC2 – worked examples 6-4 EXAMPLE 6.66 ⋅ 106 500 ⋅ 10 3 VRd. 0. Class C40 concrete.15.66 ⋅ 106 mm 4 12 S= 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 50 = 500 ⋅ 103 mm 3 100 ⋅ 66.33 kN Table of Content . d = 175 mm. Design tensile resistance in accordance with: fctd = αct fctk. No longitudinal or transverse reinforcement bars are present.c = (νmin + k1 σcp) bwd where νmin = 0.c = (0. h = 200 mm.05/γC = 1· 2. With αI = 1 it results 200 3 I = 100 ⋅ = 66.

4 Determination of shear resistance given the section geometry and mechanics [EC2 clause 6. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained from VRd. h = 600 mm. fcd = 51 MPa. d = 550 mm.1504 hence cotθ = 2.90 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.512.29 ⋅ 10 −3 = 380 kN s 150 b) For the same section and reinforcement. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd. with fck = 90 MPa.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.375 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. vertical stirrups diameter 12 mm.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. z = 500 mm.29 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1. ν = 0. fyd = 391 MPa.2171 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. with bw = 150 mm. with fck = 60 MPa.512 ⋅ 51 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2. 2 legs (Asw = 226 mm2). The example is developed for three classes of concrete.EC2 – worked examples 6-5 EXAMPLE 6. ν = 0.38 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. s = 150 mm.38 ⋅ 10−3 = 701 kN s 150 Table of Content . a) fck = 30 MPa .s = hence cotθ = 1.s = VRd.max 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.532 ⋅ 34 hence cotθ = 1. fcd = 17 MPa .532.616 ⋅ 17 it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd. fcd = 34 MPa.90 ⋅ 10 −3 = 560 kN s 150 c) For the same section and reinforcement. ν = 0.

EC2 – worked examples

6-6

Determination of reinforcement (vertical stirrups) given the beam and shear action VEd

Rectangular beam bw = 200 mm, h = 800 mm, d = 750 mm, z = 675 mm; vertical stirrups fywd = 391 MPa. Three cases are shown, with varying values of VEd and of fck. •VEd = 600 kN; fck = 30 MPa ; fcd = 17 MPa ; ν = 0.616

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 600000 Then θ = arcsin = arcsin = 29.0 o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**hence cotθ = 1.80 It results:
**

A sw VEd 600000 = = = 1.263 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.80

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/170 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·600000·1.80 = 540 kN •VEd = 900 kN; fck = 60 MPa ; fcd = 34 MPa ; ν = 0.532

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 900000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 23.74 o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.532 ⋅ 34) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**hence cotθ = 2.27 Then with it results
**

A sw VEd 900000 = = = 1.50 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2.27

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/150 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·900000·2.27= 1021 kN • VEd = 1200 kN; fck = 90 MPa ; fcd = 51 MPa ; ν = 0.512

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1200000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 21.45o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 0.512 ⋅ 51 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**As θ is smaller than 21.8o , cotθ = 2.50 Hence
**

A sw VEd 1200000 = = = 1.82 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2.50

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/120 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·1200000·2.50 = 1500 kN

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-7

EXAMPLE 6.4b – the same above, with steel S500C fyd = 435 MPa. [EC2 clause 6.2]

The example is developed for three classes of concrete. a) fck = 30 MPa ; fcd = 17 MPa ; ν = 0.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained for VRd,s = VRd,max

226 ⋅ 435 = 0.417 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17

it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd,s =

hence cotθ = 1.18

A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 1.18 ⋅ 10 −3 = 387 kN s 150

b) For the same section and reinforcement, with fck = 60 MPa , fcd = 34 MPa; ν = 0.532, proceeding as above it results:

sin 2 θ = VRd,s = 226 ⋅ 435 = 0.242 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.532 ⋅ 34

hence cotθ = 1.77

A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 1.77 ⋅ 10 −3 = 580 kN s 150

c) For the same section and reinforcement, with fck = 90 MPa, fcd = 51 MPa; ν = 0.512, proceeding as above it results:

sin 2 θ = VRd,s = 226 ⋅ 435 = 0.167 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.512 ⋅ 51

hence cotθ = 2.23

A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 2.23 ⋅ 10 −3 = 731 kN s 150

Determination of reinforcement (vertical stirrups) given the beam and shear action VEd

Rectangular beam bw = 200 mm, h = 800 mm, d = 750 mm, z = 675 mm; vertical stirrups fywd = 391 MPa. Three cases are shown, with varying values of VEd and of fck. •VEd = 600 kN; fck = 30 MPa ; fcd = 17 MPa ; ν = 0.616 then

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 600000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 29.0 o hence cotθ = 1.80 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

It results:

A sw VEd 600000 = = = 1.135 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 1.80

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/190 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·600000·1.80 = 540 kN

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-8

**• VEd = 900 kN; fck = 60 MPa ; fcd = 34 MPa ; ν = 0.532
**

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 900000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 23.74 o hence cotθ = 2.27 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.532 ⋅ 34) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

Then with it results

A sw VEd 900000 = = = 1.35 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 2.27

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/160 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·900000·2.27 = 1021 kN • VEd = 1200 kN; fck = 90 MPa ; fcd = 51 MPa ; ν = 0.512

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1200000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 21.45o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 0.512 ⋅ 51 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**As θ is smaller than 21.8o , cotθ = 2.50 Hence
**

A sw VEd 1200000 = = = 1.63 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 2.50

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/130 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·1200000·2.50 = 1500 kN

Table of Content

s (cot θ − cot α) = 0.5·605. diameter 10 mm. with bw = 150 mm h = 800 mm d = 750 mm z = 675 mm.0) . ν = 0. fcd = 17 MPa . s = 150 mm.s) ΔFtd = 0.4· (2.72 < 7.max f ywd bw s ≤ 0.0) ⋅ 0. 2 legs (Asw = 157 mm2). fyd = 391 MPa.4 kN 150 It results: VRd.616 ⋅ 17 − 1 = 2.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.5 [EC2 clause 6.5 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 150 0. fck = 30 MPa .707 ⋅ 10 −3 = 605.5 VRd.707 •The angle θ of simultaneous concrete – reinforcement steel collapse It results cot θ = bsνfcd −1 A sw f ywd sin α 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.10 157 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 0. replacing cot θ = c) Calculation of VRd 157 ⋅ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ (2.40 ≤ 0.10 + 1.5 ⋅ α cw ν1fcd sin α 157 ⋅ 391 1 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17 = 2.s = •Increase of tensile force the longitudinal bar (VEd =VRd.10 -1.616 Reinforcement: inclined stirrups 45o (cotα = 1.0) = 333 kN Table of Content . Calculation of shear resistance •Ductility is first verified by And replacing A sw .707 and.

d = 1450 mm.08⋅106)]⋅10-3 = 1087 kN Verification of compressed concrete with cot θ =1. 6. with depth 1500 mm.15 = 435 MPa Geometric elements: uk = 2(1500-150) + 2(1000-200) = 4300 mm Ak = 1350 · 800 = 1080000 mm2 Fig.3] Ring rectangular section. It results: VRd.5 MPa fyd = 500/1.707 = 1417 k N > V*Ed Table of Content .0 MPa ν = 0.6 [EC2 clause 6.85·(30/1. Fig.5⋅0. 6.707⋅0.2 Ring section subjected to torsion and shear The maximum equivalent shear in each of the vertical members is (z refers to the length of the vertical member): V*Ed = VEd / 2 + (TEd · z) / 2·Ak = [1300⋅103/2 + (700⋅106 ⋅1350)/(2⋅1.max = t z ν fcd sinθ cosθ = 200⋅1350⋅10.EC2 – worked examples 6-10 EXAMPLE 6.2. Materials: fck = 30 MPa fyk = 500 MPa Results of actions: VEd = 1300 kN (force parallel to the larger side) TEd = 700 kNm Design resistances: fcd =0.616 ν fcd = 10.5) = 17.7[1-30/250] = 0. with 200 mm wide vertical members and 150 mm wide horizontal members. width 1000 mm.

Reinforcement of horizontal members.14/(2⋅1080000⋅435) = 6855 mm2 to be distributed on the section.3(3)-EC2]. Table of Content .5 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 1350 hence cotθ = 2.14) = 0. Longitudinal reinforcement for torsion: Asl = TEd ⋅ uk ⋅ cotθ /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd) = 700⋅106⋅4300⋅2.2.14/(2⋅435) = 3198 mm2 To be placed at the lower end.14 Reinforcement of vertical members: (Asw /s) = V*Ed /(z fyd cot θ) = (1087⋅103 )/(1350⋅435⋅2.14) = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-11 Determination of angle θ: * 1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1087000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 25.03o 2 νfcd tz 2 10. pitch 200 mm. Longitudinal reinforcement for shear: Asl = VEd ⋅ cot θ / (2 ⋅ fyd ) = 1300000⋅2. 2 legs stirrups. pitch 200 mm.348 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 8 mm wide.865 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 2-legs 12 mm bars.08⋅106 ⋅435⋅2. pitch is in accordance with [9. with particular attention to the corner bars. subjected to torsion only: (Asw /s) = TEd /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd⋅cot θ) = 700⋅106 /(2⋅1.

4471⋅0.7 ⋅ ⎜ 1 − ⎟ = 0.56o (cotθ = 2.max = 2⋅10.3] resistant hollow section Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-12 EXAMPLE 6.5) = 504 kN and for the taken z = 400 mm TRd.5⋅83636⋅94⋅0. fyd = 391 MPa αcw = 1 Geometric elements A= 150000 mm2 u = 1600 mm t = A/u = 94 mm Ak = (500 – 94) ⋅ (300-94) = 83636 mm2 Assumption: θ = 26. ν fcd = 10.8945 = 66 kNm Table of Content . h = 500 mm.616 . 6.3 Rectangular section subjected to shear and torsion Example: full rectangular section b = 300 mm .5 MPa ⎝ 250 ⎠ fyk = 450 MPa .0 MPa 30 ⎞ ⎛ ν = 0.0) It results: VRd.5⋅300⋅400/(2+0.5) = 17. 6.max = αcw ⋅ bw⋅z⋅ν⋅fcd/ (cot θ+ tan θ) = 10.85·(30/1.3) Materials: fck = 30 MPa fcd = 0.7 Shear – Torsion interaction diagrams [EC2 clause 6. z =400 mm (Fig.

moreover.4.31)-EC2] In this expression.4.c = 0. V-T interaction diagram for highly stressed section The diagram is shown in Fig.3 MPa (fctk deducted from Table [3.3⋅94⋅2⋅83636 = 20.1-EC2]). On the figure other diagrams in relation with different θ values are shown as dotted lines. It results therefore: TRd.c = fctd⋅ t⋅2Ak = 1. 6.c is the value of the torsion cracking moment: τ = fctd = fctk /γc = 2. For instance.5 = 0. 6.5 = 1.c ≤ 1 where TRd.01 ⋅ 30 ) 1/3 = ( 30 ) 1/3 Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-13 Fig.0/1. Second case: light action effects Same section and materials as in the previous case.01.12 k = 1+ 200 = 1.18/1. it results: CRd. if VEd = 350 kN is taken. Points below the straight line that connects the resistance values on the two axis represent safety situations. The safety condition (absence of cracking) is expressed by: TEd /TRd. it results that the maximum compatible torsion moment is 20 kNm.63 500 1/3 (100ρlfck ) = (100 ⋅ 0. ρ = 0.c ⋅ k ⋅ (100ρl fck ) ⎤ ⋅ b w d ⎣ ⎦ [(6.c = ⎡CRd.c + VEd /VRd.4 kNm 1/3 VRd.

5 The section.c = 0. in the range of action effects defined by the interaction diagram.08 ⋅ √fck)/fyk = (0.75⋅450 = 337 mm. stirrups of 6 mm diameter with 180 mm pitch can be placed. should have a minimal reinforcement in accordance with [9.5 V-T interaction diagram for lightly stressed section Table of Content .08 ⋅ √30)/450 = 0.. which prescribes for shear: (Asw / s⋅bw) min = (0. stirrups must be closed and their pitch must not be larger than u/8.63⋅ (30)1/3 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 450 = 82.75d = 0. the minimal quantity of stirrups must be in accordance with [9. It results : Asw/s.EC2 – worked examples 6-14 Taking d = 450 mm it results: VRd.010 with s not larger than 0.e.2 (5)-EC2] and [9. For instance. 6. 200 mm. Because of the torsion. i.2. Namely.0 kN The diagram is shown in Fig.2.0010 Fig.12⋅1.2 (6)-EC2].6.5N-EC2].bw = 2⋅28/(180⋅300) = 0.

EC2 – worked examples

6-15

EXAMPLE 6.8. Wall beam [EC2 clause 6.5]

Geometry: 5400 x 3000 mm beam (depth b = 250 mm), 400 x 250 mm columns, columns reinforcement 6φ20 We state that the strut location C2 is 200 cm from the bottom reinforcement, so that the inner drive arm is equal to the elastic solution in the case of a wall beam with ratio 1/h=2, that is 0.67 h; it suggests to use the range (0.6 ÷ 0.7)·l as values for the lever arm, lower than the case of a slender beam with the same span.

Fig. 6.6 5400 x 3000 mm wall beam.

**Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa, steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa
**

f cd =

f yd =

0.85f ck 0.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14.17 N / mm 2 , 1.5 1.5

f yk 1.15 = 450 = 391.3 N / mm 2 1.15

**nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes
**

⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 25 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.18 ⎜1⎟ 14.17 = 15 N / mm 0.85 250 ⎝ ⎠

σ1Rd,max

nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in a fixed direction

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-16

σ 2Rd,max

⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 25 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 14.17 = 12.75 N / mm 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 25 ⎞ ⎝ 2 = k3 f cd = 0.88 ⎜ 1⎟ 14.17 = 11.22 N / mm 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠

nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions

σ 3Rd,max

**Actions Distributed load: 150 kN/m upper surface and 150 kN/m lower surface
**

Columns reaction

**R = (150+150)⋅5.40/2 = 810 kN
**

Evaluation of stresses in lattice bars

Equilibrium node 1 Equilibrium node 3

C1 = C3 =

ql = 405 kN 2 R = 966 kN senα

(where α = arctg

2000 = 56.98° ) 1300

T1 = C 3 cosα = 526 kN

**Equilibrium node 2 Equilibrium node 4
**

Tension rods

C2 = C3cosα = T1 = 526 kN T2 = ql = 405 kN 2

**The tension rod T1 requires a steel area not lower than:
**

A s1 ≥ 526000 = 1344 mm 2 391.,3

we use 6φ18 = 1524 mm2,

the reinforcement of the lower tension rod are located at the height of 0,12 h = 360 mm The tension rod T2 requires a steel area not lower than:

A s1 ≥ 405000 = 1035 mm 2 391.3

We use 4φ20 = 1257 mm2

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-17

Nodes verification

Node 3 The node geometry is unambiguously defined by the column width, the wall depth (250 mm), the height of the side on which the lower bars are distributed and by the strut C3 fall (Fig. 6.7)

Fig. 6.7 Node 3, left support.

The node 3 is a compressed-stressed node by a single direction reinforcement anchor, then it is mandatory to verify that the maximal concrete compression is not higher than the value:

σ 2Rd,max = 12.75 N / mm 2

σ c1 =

810000 = 8.1 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd,max 400 ⋅ 250

Remark as the verification of the column contact pressure is satisfied even without taking into account the longitudinal reinforcement (6φ20) present in the column.

σ c2 =

966000 = 7.27 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd,max 531.6 ⋅ 250

Table of Content

85f ck 0.83 = 20.5 f 450 f yd = yk = = 391.5 1. 1.9.5] Geometry: 250 x 400 mm cantilever (width b = 400 mm).15 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-18 EXAMPLE 6.83 N / mm 2 .85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.8 250 x 400 mm thick cantilever beam. beam b x h = 400 x 400 mm Fig.max Table of Content .9 Cantilever beam S&T model. Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.3 N / mm 2 1. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.12 N / mm 0. 6.18 ⎜1⎟ 19.85 250 ⎝ ⎠ σ1Rd. ac < hc/2 [EC2 clause 6. Fig. Thick short corbel. 6.15 f cd = nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1. 150 x 300 load plate.

88 ⎜ 1⎟ 19.85 250 ⎝ ⎠ σ 2Rd.max Actions FEd = 700 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column side: e = 125 mm (Fig. 6. cosθ senθ ⎠ ⎝ Table of Content .05 N / mm 0.max nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions σ 3Rd.2d = 0. 6.83 = 15 N / mm 0.10 in order to make the partition of the diagonal stress F F ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ Fdiag = c = Ed ⎟ between them.8⋅d (z = 0.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = Secondary upper reinforcement design: The beam proposed in EC2 is indeterminate.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.14 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd. but we need to know the stiffness of the two elementary beams shown in Fig.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ ⎝ 2 = k3 f cd = 0. then it is not possible to evaluate the stresses for each single bar by equilibrium equations only.9) We state that the upper reinforcement is located 40 mm from the upper cantilever side.12 ⋅ 400 the node 1 is located x1/2 ≅ 44 mm from the outer column side (Fig. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is evaluated setting the internal drive arm z equal to 0.8) The beam vertical strut width is evaluated by setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.2·360 = 72 mm rotational equilibrium: FEd a = Fc z Fc = Ft = 700000 ⋅ (125 + 44) = Fc ⋅ 288 700000 ⋅ (125 + 44) = 410763 N ≅ 411 kN 288 node 1verification: σ= Fc 411000 = = 7.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 72 ) Ft 411000 = = 1050 mm 2 we use 8φ14 (As = 1232 mm2) f yd 391. 6.8⋅360 = 288 mm): y1 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-19 nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in a fixed direction ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 19.max = 20.max b = 700000 ≅ 87 mm 20.83 = 17.

6.10 S&T model resolution in two elementary beams and partition of the diagonal stress Fdiag.2.max = 17.25 ⋅1232 = 308 mm 2 f yd 391. 6. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 700000 = = 15.1): Fwd z 288 2 −1 2⋅ −1 a 125 + 44 = Fc = 411 ≅ 211 kN 3 + FEd / Fc 3 + 700 / 411 Fwd 211000 = ≅ 539 mm 2 ≥ k1 ⋅ A s = 0.3 A sw = we use 5 stirrups φ 10. based on the trend of main compressive stresses resulting from linear elastic analysis at finite elements. where the main reinforcement is anchored.8.56 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.2. below the load plate: The node 2 is a tied-compressed node.EC2 – worked examples 6-20 Fig. and they have provided the following expression of stress in the secondary reinforcement (MC90 par. double armed (Asw = 785 mm2) node 2 verification. some researcher of Stuttgart have determined the two rates in which Fdiag is divided.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 300 45000 Table of Content .

then as in the previous example one more boundary condition is needed to evaluate the stresses values in the rods.10 Thick cantilever beam. 6. The model proposed in EC2 (Fig. This assumption corresponds to the statement that when a ≤ z/2 (a very thick cantilever). 6.5] Geometry: 325 x 300 mm cantilever beam (width b = 400 mm).13a) and when a ≥ 2⋅z the beam 2 only (Fig.12 Cantilever S&T model.12) is indeterminate. 6. 150 x 220 mm load plate.11 325 x 300 mm cantilever. a) b) Fig. the resistant beam is the beam 1 only (Fig.13.EC2 – worked examples 6-21 EXAMPLE 6. in the range Fwd = 0 when a = z/2 and Fwd = FEd when a = 2⋅z.13b). 6. 6. Elementary beams of the S&T model. ac > hc/2 [EC2 clause 6. The stress Fwd in the vertical tension rod is evaluated assuming a linear relation between Fwd and the a value. 6. Fig. Table of Content . 400 x 400 mm column Fig.

2d = 0.12 ⋅ 400 node 1 is located x1/2 = 31 mm from the outer side of the column.3 N / mm 2 1. 3 in conclusion.8⋅260 = 208 mm): y1 = 0.15 = 450 = 391.5 1. the expression for Fwd is: Fwd = Fw1 a + Fw2 z when the two conditions Fwd (a = ) = 0 and Fwd (a = 2z) = FEd are imposed.EC2 – worked examples 6-22 Assumed this statement. the upper reinforcement is stated to be 40 mm from the cantilever outer side.max = 17.max = 20. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd. some trivial 2 algebra leads to: Fw1 = 2 FEd 3 z and Fw2 = − FEd .05 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.8⋅d (z = 0.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values of the previous example): Compressed nodes σ1Rd.83 N / mm 2 .max = 15 N/mm 2 Actions: FEd = 500 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column outer side: e = 200 mm The column vertical strut width is evaluated setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.5 f yk 1. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is calculated setting the internal drive arm z to be 0. a − Ed = FEd 3 z 3 3 Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.max b = 500000 ≅ 62 mm 20. 1.12 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.2·260 = 52 mm Table of Content .85f ck 0. the expression for Fwd as a function of a is the following: Fwd = F 2 FEd 2a / z − 1 .

208 Fc = Ft = 500000 ⋅ (200 + 31) = 555288 N ≅ 556 kN 208 node 1 verification σ= Fc 556000 = = 13.15 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.3 FEd 500000 = 0.max = 20. in which the main reinforcement is anchored.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = we use 8φ16 (As = 1608 mm2) Secondary reinforcement design: (the expression deduced at the beginning of this example is used) a 2 −1 Fw = z FEd ≅ 204 kN 3 Aw = Fw 204000 = = 521 mm 2 f yd 391.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 220 33000 Table of Content .12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 52 ) Ft 556000 = = 1421 mm 2 f yd 391.5 = 639 mm 2 f yd 391.max = 17. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 500000 = = 15.3 EC2 suggests a minimum secondary reinforcement of: Aw ≥ k2 we use 3 stirrups φ 12 (As = 678 mm2) node 2 verification. below the load plate: The node 2 is a compressed-stressed node.EC2 – worked examples 6-23 rotational equilibrium: x ⎞ ⎛ FEd ⎜ a c + 1 ⎟ = Fc z 2⎠ ⎝ 500000 (200+31) = Fc .37 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.

(Fig.4.5] Two different strut-tie trusses can be considered for the design of a Gerber beam.14 Possible strut and tie models for a Gerber beam.85f ck 0. Even if the EC2 allows the possibility to use only one strut and then only one reinforcement arrangement.9. we remark as the scheme b) results to be poor under load.2. a) b) Fig.3 N / mm 2 1. because of the complete lack of reinforcement for the bottom border of the beam. eventually in a combined configuration [EC2 (10. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.14). Hereafter we report the partition of the support reaction between the two trusses.EC2 – worked examples 6-24 EXAMPLE 6. Materials: concrete steel C25/30 B450C fck = 25 MPa.5 1. It seems to be opportune to combine the type b) reinforcement with the type a) one.5 f yk 1. and the latter will carry at least half of the beam reaction. 1. 6. On the other hand.17 N / mm 2 .11 Gerber beam [EC2 clause 6.15 [(3. 6.6)].85 ⋅ 25 = = 14.15 = 450 = 391. it is necessary to consider a longitudinal top reinforcement to anchor both the vertical stirrups and the confining reinforcement of the tilted strut C1. if only the scheme a) is used.7 (4)-EC2] Actions: Distributed load: 250 kN/m Beam spam: 8000 mm RSdu = 1000 kN Bending moment in the beam mid-spam: MSdu = 2000 kNm Beam section: b x h = 800 x 1400 mm Bottom longitudinal reinforcement (As): 10φ24 = 4524 mm2 Table of Content .

4⋅x ≅ 40 mm from the upper surface) while the top reinforcement stress is: C’ = Es ε’s A’s = 200000·0.3 ⋅ ( 99 − 50 ) = 0. the depth of the neutral axis is evaluated from the section translation equilibrium: 0.8 b x fcd = 0.00173·2513 Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-25 Top longitudinal reinforcement (As’): 8φ20 = 2513 mm2 Truss a) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN Definition of the truss rods position The compressed longitudinal bar has a width equal to the depth x of the section neutral axis and then it is x/2 from the top border.0035 and then: x = 99 mm ' εs = f 0.0035 391. 6.8b x f cd + E s 0. the compressive stress in the concrete is C = 0. as stated in the calculation.0035 ⋅ (x − d ') where d’ = 50 mm is the distance of the upper surface reinforcement x x − 50 A's = f yd A s x 0. ' = εs 0.15 Truss a.17 (applied at 0.8·800·99·14.8 b x fcd + Es ε’s A’s = fyd As Fig.00173 ≤ yd = = 0.00196 99 E s 200000 then the compressed steel strain results lower than the strain in the elastic limit.

3 366000 = 935 mm 2 391.77° 425 C1 = R = 620 kN sinα T2 = C1 ⋅ cosα = 366 kN Node 2 equilibrium: β = arctg C 2 cosβ + C 3 cos45° = T2 C 2sinβ = C3sin45° 580 = 38. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-26 (applied at 50 mm from the upper surface) the compression net force (C + C’) results to be applied at 45 mm from the beam upper surface.3 Fig. 66° 725 T2 = 260 kN sinβ + cosβ sinβ C3 = ⋅ C 2 = 230 kN sin45° C2 = ⇒ Node 3 equilibrium: T1 = C1 sin α + C2 sin β = 663 kN Tension rods design the tension rod T1 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 stirrups φ 16 double arm (Asl = 2000 mm2) the tension rod T2 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 φ 16 (Asl = 1000 mm2).45 = 580 mm from the tension rod T2. 6. Truss b) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN 663000 = 1694 mm 2 391.16 Calculation scheme for the truss b bars stresses. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Node 1 equilibrium: α = arctg 580 = 53. then the horizontal strut has the axis at 675 – 50 .

EC2 – worked examples 6-27 node 1 equilibrium C’1 = 500 kN node 2 equilibrium C’2 = C’1 = 500 kN T'1 = 2 ⋅ C'1 = 707 kN node 3 equilibrium C’3 = T’1 = 707 kN T’2 = (T’1 + C’3)·cos 45° = 1000 kN Tension rods for tension rod T’2 it is necessary to adopt a steel area not lower than: 1000000 A s1 ≥ = 2556 mm 2 391.3 6φ24 = 2712 mm2 are adopted. Table of Content . a lower reinforcement area would be sufficient for tension rod T’1 but for question of bar anchoring the same reinforcement as in T’2 is adopted.

17 Log plinth on pilings.8) Compressed nodes σ1Rd.75 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ3Rd.max = 11.5 1. 6. diameter 800 mm piles Fig.15 = 450 = 391.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values as in the example 6.85f ck 0.12 Pile cap [EC2 clause 6.5] Geometry: 4500 x 4500 mm plinth (thickness b=1500 mm). 1. Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.max = 15 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ2Rd.EC2 – worked examples 6-28 EXAMPLE 6.3 N / mm 2 1.22 N/mm2 Pedestal pile NSd = 2000 kN MSd = 4000 kNm Table of Content .max = 12.5 f yd = f yk 1.17 N / mm 2 .85 ⋅ 25 f cd = = = 14. 2000 x 700 mm columns.

17) till to the orthogonal planes π2 and π3.18.4⋅x ≅ 185 mm from the upper surface) piles stress pile stresses are evaluated considering the column actions transfer in two steps: in the first step. the plinth own weight is considered negligible. 6.8·700·462·14. Fig. 6. 6.8·700·x·14.17 = 3666062 N = 3666 kN (applied at 0.NSd/2) = (4000/3. the truss-tie beam in Fig.00 .EC2 – worked examples 6-29 Tied reinforcement in the pile: 8 φ 26 (As = 4248 mm2) The compressive stress Fc in the concrete and the steel tension Fs on the pedestal pile are evaluated from the ULS verification for normal stresses of the section itself: Fs = fyd As = 391.8 b x fcd – Fs ⇒ 2000000 = 0. Table of Content .00 + 2000/2) = 2333 kN B’ = (MSd/3.00 .17 − 1662242 ⇒ x = 462 mm The compressive stress in the concrete is: C = 0.8 b x fcd = 0.3·4248 = 1662242 N = 1662 kN NSd = 0. then in the second step the transfer is inside the planes π2 and π3 till to the piles.00 + NSd/2) = (4000/3. the transfer of the forces Fc e Fs happens in the plane π1 (Fig. S&T model in the plane π1.2000/2) = 333 kN A=A’/2 = 1167 kN B=B’/2 = 167 kN for each compressed pile: In the evaluation of stresses on piles.18 is relative to the transfer in the plane π1: compression: tension: for each tied pile: A’ = (MSd/3.

5° θ12 = arctg (1300 / 600) = 65.2° T10 = Fs = 1662 kN T11 = A’ cot θ11 = 2333 cot 26.3 Tension rod 10 (plinth tied reinforcement) 11 12 13 14 15 16 Force (kN) 1662 1544 154 1167 1188 170 167 Required reinforcement (mm2) 4248 3946 394 2982 3036 434 427 Bars 8φ26 9φ24 1φ12/20 (6φ12) stirrups 10φ20 7φ24 1φ12/20 (5φ12) Pile reinforcement Table of Content .2° = 154 kN Fig.19 Trusses in plan π2 and in plan π3.5° T13 = A = 1167 kN T14 = A cot θ13 = 1167 cot 44. 6.5° = 170 kN T16 = B = 167 kN design of tension rods Table 6.5° = 1188 kN T15 = B cot θ13 = 167 cot 44.EC2 – worked examples 6-30 θ11 = arctg (1300 / 860) = 56.5° = 1544 kN T12 = B’ cot θ12 = 333 cot 65. θ13 = arctg (1300 / 1325) = 44.

the compressive stresses are very small as a consequence of the piles section large area.20. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-31 Fig.: σc = A 2333000 = = 4. Schematic placement of reinforcements. In these latter.64 N mm 2 2 2 π⋅r π ⋅ 400 Table of Content . Nodes verification Concentrated nodes are only present at the pedestal pile and on the piles top.

13 Variable height beam [EC2 clause 6.60) ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.85 250 ⎝ ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 17 = 14.EC2 – worked examples 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.85f ck 0.5 f yk 1.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ1Rd.5 1.88 ⎜1⎟ 17 = 13.15 Nodes compressive resistance: compressed nodes (EC2 eq.3 N / mm 2 1.18 ⎜ 1⎟ 17 = 17.65 N / mm 0. 6. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.5] Geometry: length 22500 mm.16 N / mm 0.96 N / mm 0.15 = 450 = 391.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ ⎝ 2 = k3 f cd = 0. 6. rectangular section 300 x 3500 mm and 300 x 2000 mm Fig.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd. 1.21 Variable height beam Materials: concrete C30/37 fck = 30 MPa.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .max loads F = 1200 kN (the own weight of the beam is negligible) Table of Content .

Fig.6 109 ⇒ x = 522 mm C = fcd 0.8·522·300 = 2129760 N = 2130 kN Table of Content .4 x) = 3. 6. 6.6·109 7752000·x – 1632·x2 = 3.8·x·b = 17·0. while the remaining part of the beam is composed of D type regions.EC2 – worked examples 6-33 strut&tie model identification Beam partitioning in two regions B and D The region standing on the middle section is a continuity region (B).8·x·300·(1900 – 0.22 Identification of B and D regions.4 x) = 3. Calculation of stresses in the region B The stress-block diagram is used for the concrete compressive stresses distribution. rotational equilibrium: fcd 0.00 = 3600 kNm = 3. Stresses evaluation for the bars of the S&T model Tmax = 1200 kN Mmax = 1200 ⋅ 3.23 Shear and bending moment diagrams. The boundary conditions for the stress in the region B.6·109 17·0.8·x·b·(d – 0.6⋅109 Nmm Fig.

Strut and tie model.EC2 – worked examples 6-34 Identification of boundary stresses in the region D Fig.26.24 Reactions and boundary stresses in the region D. 6. 6. Fig. strut&tie model Fig.26. 6.41° . 6.25 shows the load paths characterized by Schlaich in the strut&tie model identification.76° 3000 while the strut C4 tilting is 1690 θ1 = arctg = 48. 6. shown in Fig. Fig. The strut C2 tilting is 3190 θ = arctg = 46. 1500 Table of Content .25 Load paths.

and it has to be disposed on both sides of the structural member and in both directions. The following table reports the evaluation for the reinforcement area required for the three tension bars T1. 6.3 = 2883 mm2 on two layers 6 2 18 φ 20 = 5655 mm2 stirrups φ 12 / 10” 2 legs = 2260 mm2/m (2260 ⋅ 1.10 % ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1000 = 300 mm2/m e di 150 mm2/m) are used.61)-EC2] σ2Rd.) T2 = T3. Table 6.10 % of the concrete area.96 N/mm2 Table of Content .13·10 /391.7 suggests that the minimum reinforcement for the wall beams is the 0.) C3 = C2 cos θ = T3 (Node B horizontal equil.3 = 5443 mm As = 1.50 = 3390 mm2) 10 φ 20 = 3142 mm2 Verification of nodes Node A (left support) Fig. Table 6. T2 and T3.max = 14.50 m length As = 1. and not less than 150 mm2/m.4 C1 T1 C2 T3 T2 C3 Floop C4 C5 See stresses evaluation in the region B T1=C1 C2 = F/sin θ (Node A vertical equilibrium) T3 = C2 cos θ (Node A horizontal equilibrium.EC2 – worked examples 6-35 The following table reports the value for the stresses in the different beam elements.) Floop = C1 – C3 C4 = Floop/cos θ C 5 = T2 ⋅ 2 ( Node C vertical equil.3 = 2883 mm2 on 1.27 Node A. Bars φ 12 / 20” (=565 mm2/m > 0. because C5 is 45° tilted (node C equil.128·106/391.) 2130 kN 2130 kN 1647 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1002 kN 1509 kN 1595 kN Steel tension rods design EC2 point 9.128·106/391.5 T1 T2 T3 As = 2. tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction [(6.

6. a3 = 522 mm (coincident with the depth of the neutral axis in the region B) σ c3 = C3 1.28 Node B.65 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 522 300 ⋅ 522 load plate dimensions: 1. this last choice is adopted.76° = 219 + 103 = 322 mm 1.65 a 300 x 300 mm plate is used Strut verification Table of Content .65 N/mm2 Fig.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 322 u has to be higher (it is mandatory a reinforcement on more than two layers.76° + 150 cos 46. and the length is increased from 300 to 400 mm: a2 = 400 sin 46.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 394 Node B Compressed nodes σ1Rd.05 N / mm 2 > 14.2 ⋅106 = 80214 mm 2 14.93 N / mm 2 ≤ 14.27): u = 150 mm a1 = 300 mm a2 = 300 sin 46.128 ⋅106 = = 7.max = 1.2 N / mm 2 ≤ 17.EC2 – worked examples 6-36 Loading plate area: A≥ Fc1 σ 2Rd. 6. or an increase of the plate length).647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 13.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 17.96 a 300 x 300 mm plate (A = 90000 mm2) is used the reinforcement for the tension rod T3 is loaded on two layers (Fig.76° + 150 cos 46.2 ⋅106 a* ≥ = 227 mm 300 ⋅17.max = 17.76° = 291 + 103 = 394 mm 1.

which stress has been verified before in the forces evaluation for the region B) can spread between the two ends.25·C2 = 0.3 then the minimum reinforcement (1 φ 12 / 20” on both sides and in both directions. the strut C1. The transversal stress for the split of the most stressed strut (C2) is: Ts ≤ 0. in this way the maximal stresses are in the nodes. Table of Content . for the reinforcement required to carry this stress: As = 412000 = 1053 mm 2 . that is as = 1130 mm2/m) is enough to carry the transversal stresses.25 1647 = 412 kN.EC2 – worked examples 6-37 The compressive range for each strut (only exception. 391. and then.

5] 3500 kN load on a 800x500 rectangular column by a 300x250 mm cushion Materials: concrete steel f cd = f yd = C30/37 B450C fck = 30 MPa. In this case there is a partial discontinuity.7(1)P-EC2] sends the reader to paragraph [(6.EC2 – worked examples 6-38 EXAMPLE 6.15 loading area Ac0 = 300·250 = 75000 mm2 dimensions of the load distribution area d2 ≤ 3 d1 = 3·300 = 900 mm b2 ≤ 3 b1 = 3·250 = 750 mm maximal load distribution area Ac1 = 900·750 = 675000 mm2 load distribution height h ≥ (b 2 − b1 ) = 750 − 250 = 500 mm h ≥ (d 2 − d 1 ) = 900 − 300 = 600 mm ⇒ h = 600 mm Ultimate compressive stress FRdu = A c0 f cd A c1 / A c0 = 75000 ⋅17 ⋅ 675000 / 75000 = 3825 kN ≤ ≤ 3.5 f yk 1. just as in this example.5 1.15 = 450 = 391.3 N / mm 2 .825 ⋅106 N It is worth to observe that the FRdu upper limit corresponds to the the maximal value Ac1 = 3 Ac0 for the load distribution area.85f ck 0.14.0 ⋅17 ⋅ 75000 = 3. the 3500kN load results to be lower than FRdu . Reinforcement design Point [6. 1. 3500 kN concentrated load [EC2 clause 6. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa 0.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .0 f cd A c0 = 3.7(4)-EC2] recommends the use of a suitable reinforcement capable to sustain the transversal shrinkage stresses and point [6. 1.5)EC2] to analyse this topic. then: a = 250 mm Table of Content . because the strut width (500 mm) is lower than the distribution height (600 mm).

5 = 1178 mm2.EC2 – worked examples 6-39 b = 500 mm F b − a 3500 500 − 250 = = 437. Table of Content .3 T= the steel area required to carry T is: As ≥ using 10 mm diameter bars. 15 bars are required for a total area of: As = 15 ⋅ 78.5 kN 4 b 4 500 T 437500 = = 1118 mm 2 f yd 391.

Member Design . two ballast retaining walls and.2 “slabs” by prof. table 4.s 6.60 m with two side-walks of 1. Fig. Design and Performance Vol.Design for Fire Resistance .1 Description of the structure The design example proposed in this section is related to a railway bridge deck made up by a continuous slab on three spans with two orders of prestressing tendons (longitudinal and transverse prestressing). The slab presents a constant thickness of 1. 3: Durability . whilst is tapered towards the extremity with a final height of 0.6 m.15 Slabs1. Part 2. Assessment and Repair . December 1999). in the middle.4] As two dimensional member a prestressed concrete slab is analysed: the actual structure is described in the following point.15. Mancini.textbook (292 pages.29 Plan view of the structure and supports’ scheme 1 Example taken from example 7.Practical aspects” Manual . 2 Table of Content . bridge design.EC2 – worked examples 6-40 EXAMPLE 6. 6. “Structural Concrete Textbook on Behaviour.29 and 6. 6.50 m for a central zone 7. The deck rests on abutments and circular piers and has a overall breadth of 13. FIB Bullettin n°3.118) for fatigue reasons. See too EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2. Fig.2 – 7. ISBN 9782-88394-043-7.40 m width.1 – 6.30 represent the principal geometric dimension of the slab bridge and supports’ scheme.3 – 7.Maintenance.2 [EC2 clause 5. two track spacing of 5.0 m width.2 – 7. The slab is designed in category A (see Eurocode 2.10 – 6.0 m.

Ec = 29. fyd = 434. The minimum concrete cover for Class 2 is equal to 25 mm.0 MPa. Es = 200.6”): 0.8 MPa. fcd1 = 17.EC2 – worked examples 6-41 Fig. Grade 500: design strength: modulus of elasticity: Concrete cover fck = 35. as a consequence the nominal value for concrete cover results: cnom = cmin + 10 = 25 + 10 = 35 mm adopted in the calculations.2 fptk = 1800 MPa. 6.3 MPa.1 MPa.4·103 MPa ν = 0. As environmental condition an Exposure Class 2 may be considered (Humid environment with frost: exterior components exposed to frost). fcd = 23. (strands φ 0.1% proofstress total elongation at maximum load: modulus of elasticity: − Reinforcing steel. fcd2 = 12. Table of Content .7·103 MPa.0 MPa.30 Geometric dimensions of bridge cross section Material properties The following materials properties have been considered: − Concrete Grade 35: compressive design strength: compressive resistance for uncracked zones: compressive resistance for cracked zones: mean value of tensile strength: modulus of elasticity: shear modulus: Poisson ratio: − Prestressing steel. which should be added to the tolerance value of 10mm.0·103 MPa. G = 12.1k = 1600 MPa εpu > 35‰ Ep = 195. fp0.0·103 MPa.23 MPa. fctm = 3. fyk = 500.0 MPa.

32 Plan of FEM model and considered elements The adopted shell elements are oriented with the following guidelines: − local axis 2 is oriented as global axis Y of the deck.31 and 6. Positive forces for FEM program output are reported in Fig. Fig. − local axis 3 is oriented in the opposite direction of global axis X of the deck. 6. In Fig 6. − local axis 1 is oriented as global axis Z of the deck.EC2 – worked examples 6-42 6.2 Structural model To evaluate the internal actions on the structure a linear FEM analysis has been performed adopting shell elements to represent the reinforced slab. The thickness of shell elements has been assumed constant for the inner zone of the slab and stepped to fashion the tapered extremity.32 the FEM model is sketched and the different thick of the element is reported too. this kind of element takes account of all the slab and plate components as well as the out-of-plane shear forces.15. 6.31 Transverse view of FEM model Fig.33: Table of Content . 6.

behaves like a Table of Content . 6. thus.34 shows a symbolic notation for the external restraints with the nodes involved.33 Positive actions for FEM elements Restraints The external restraints have been introduced in the FEM model considering their real geometric dimensions. 6. Fig. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-43 Fig. Fig. few nodes have been restrained by means of spring elements in order to represent only an individual restraint or support. For the x and y directions. it may be assumed that the pier.34 External restraints on the FEM model The elastic constant of the spring restraining elements is calculated to have the same stiffness of the substructure (abutments or piers) on which the slab is rested. or the abutment front wall.

tot 10 kN/m 9. For the vertical direction. Table of Content .tot 10 kN/m 178. Each tendon is built up with 19 strands φ 0.85 × 1600 = 1360 MPa.35 reports tendon’s layout for half deck.55 6 Ky.tot 10 kN/m 10.EC2 – worked examples 6-44 single column fixed at the base and free at his top.61 10. The number of tendons is 39 for the longitudinal direction and 64 for the transverse one.6 .66 2.85 fp 0.max = 0.6 Stiffness for restraining elements It can be noticed that the previous values are referred to the overall stiffness of the restraint.6” having an area of 1. The initial tensile stress of tendon is: σpo.39 cm2.1k = 0. so that the relevant Kx/y stiffness is valuable as: Kx / y = 3E I H3 where E is the Young modulus.74 2. thus the elastic constant of any individual spring element may be obtained dividing the K values of table 6. For the sake of simplicity the calculus of the relevant stiffness is omitted and the final values of the spring constants are reported in table 6. Location Abutment A Pier P1 Pier P2 Abutment B Kx. Fig. being symmetrically disposed. considering the substructure vertical behaviour as rigid.78 6 Kz.80 4.02 11.02 6 Table 6. Prestressing forces Two orders of prestressing tendons are arranged (in longitudinal and transverse directions) in order to avoid any tensile stress in concrete at service (required by railway code). I the inertia and H the height of the column.61 11. 6.6 by the number of element representing the restraint or the supports. the intrinsic stiffness of pot-bearing is assumed.

Prestressing has to be introduced in the FEM model in order to calculated the hyperstatic actions that arise in the structural scheme. should be applied consistently at the nodes of FEM model.01 rad/m coefficient of friction between the tendons and their sheathing.35 Plan and principal section of tendon layout Immediate losses of prestressing due to friction have been evaluated by means of the following expression: σpo (x) = σpo. Considering prestressing as an external load. Table of Content . unintentional angular deviation.EC2 – worked examples 6-45 Fig. The equivalent loads may be calculated subdividing the tendon profile into elementary segments and evaluating the internal action able to equilibrate the external one due to end actions deriving by the prestressing. it is possible to introduce it by means of two inclined forces at anchorages (representing actions at the extremity) and of a system of equivalent loads along tendon’s profile (representing tendon curvature and losses due to friction): these actions per tendon. 6.19 k = 0.max ⋅ e-μ(α + k x) with: μ = 0.

shall be introduced in the FEM model. only nodal forces can be considered so that it is necessary to place segment extremities within two sequential nodes. consequently the segment extremities may be placed indifferently at nodes or at the middle of the element. It can be notice that the forces at the end of each segment extremity are the same with opposite signs. the forces at the extremity of the cable plus the equilibrating system for each segment. depending on whether the right or the left segment is considered. the equilibrating vertical and horizontal forces in the i-segment result: Fv. Finally. do not coincide with a nodal alignment.36 Effect of prestressing on a segment and equivalent loads Fig.i = P2 cos θ2 P1 cos θ1 Table of Content . The choice of the position of the elementary segments is relative to the kind of element adopted in the FEM model. 6. As a simple rule. it is possible to introduce a point load (or moment) whether along the element body or at nodes. for each tendon. .36 represents the forces acting on a segment of concrete due to a curved prestressing tendon. With shell elements. If beam elements are used. if the inclination of the cable changes from θ1 to θ2 while the prestress force changes from P1 to P2 due to friction. due to the two-dimensional scheme. 6.i = P2 sin θ2 P1 sin θ1 while the balancing moment turns out: Mi = (P2 cos θ2 e2 P1 cos θ1 e1 ) (P2 sin θ2 P1 sin θ1 ) a/2 The above procedure should be repeated for all the segments. Fh. 6. furthermore. one has to consider the transverse position of the tendon that. in general.EC2 – worked examples 6-46 Fig.37 may be followed. the indications of Fig. these forces cancel out themselves with the exception at anchorages.

c+s+r : t0 = 28 days: loss of initial tendon stress due to creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of steel. 6.55 ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 1. t∞ = 25550 ds. c + s + r = ε cs ( t ∞ .: corresponding to a life-time of 70 years.t0) = εcs0 × βs (t∞ . t 0 ) ( σ cg + σ cp 0 ) 1+ α ⎤ A p ⎡⎛ Ac 2 ⎞ zcp ⎟ (1 + 0.t0) = 0.574 0. βs (t∞ .8 φ ( t ∞ .t0) : shrinkage strain at time t∞ calculated from: εcs (t∞ . between time t0 and time t∞. t 0 ))⎥ ⎢⎜1 + A c ⎣⎝ Ic ⎠ ⎦ where: Δσp.000395 fcm = mean compressive strenght of concrete at 28 days = fck + 8 MPa.127 × 10-3 where: εcso = εs ( fcm) × βRH with: εs ( fcm) = [160 + 10 βsc (9 f cm /fcmo)] × 10-6 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-47 Fig. fcmo = 10 MPa.37 Transverse distribution of prestressing Time-dependent prestressing losses Time-dependent losses of prestress may be evaluated by means of the following equation: Δσ p . t 0 ) Es + Δσ pr + α φ ( t ∞ . ⎡ ⎛ RH ⎞ 3 ⎤ βRH = −1.035 ⋅ h 2 + t ∞ − t 0 Table of Content . ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎝ 100 ⎠ ⎦ RH = 70 % relative humidity of the ambient atmosphere. εcs (t∞.018. age of concrete at prestressing time. βsc = 5 for rapid hardening cements.t0) = t∞ − t0 = 0.

t0) = 1.598 with φRH = 1 + β( fcm) = β(t0) = 1 − RH 100 = 1. 6.3 ⎛ t∞ − t0 ⎞ βc (t∞ .3 = 2.t0) = φ0 ×βc (t∞ .EC2 – worked examples 6-48 h = (2Ac / u) = 1217 mm notional size of member. φ (t∞ . fcm fcmo 1 = 0.c+s+r (where σpgo is the effective initial stress in tendons due to dead load and prestressing) and evaluated as percentage by the following formula: ρt = ρ1000h t ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 1000 ⎠ 0 . Δσpr : loss of prestressing due to relaxation of steel calculated for a reduced initial tensile stress of σp = σpgo 0. the following values for εcs (t∞ .281. at least for creep value. u = 28640 mm perimeter of the member in contact with the atmosphere. t0) = 182.62 × 10-6 in good aggrement with the previous one. ρ1000h = is the relaxation after 1000 hours evaluated from Fig. t0) may be evaluated: ε cs (t∞ .19 = ρ1000h × 3 where ρt = is the relaxation after t hours.1 + t 0 0.43×106 mm2 gross section of the beam.t0) : creep coefficient at time t∞ calculated from: φ (t∞.5754 If the improved prediction model of chapter 3 is used.012 RH) = 0. Ac = 17.38.5708 where: φo = φRH × β( fcm) × β(t0) = 1.488 0.983 18 with [ ] h + 250 = 2155 > 1500 → 1500 . for t > 50 years ρt. t0) = 1. 0. φ (t∞. Table of Content .556.5 1 + (0. = ρ1000h × 3.2 0. t0) and for φ(t∞ .1 3 h 5.t0) = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ βH + t ∞ − t 0 ⎠ βH = 1.3 Δσp.

as percentage of initial steel tension. stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to prestressing.6 = 199.1 may be obtained: Qvk = 1. For the LM71. lever arm between centroid of concrete gross section and prestressing steel. As vertical train load the load model LM71 plus the load models SW (SW/0 and SW/2 respectively) have been adopted with an α coefficient of 1.1×250×φdin = 319. inertia of concrete gross section.15. Time-dependent losses of prestressing should be calculated for each tendon along his profile so that a correct value may be used for each element. the 4 point loads have been reduced in an equivalent uniform load by smearing their characteristic value Qvk along the influence length so that a qvk. area of prestressing steel at the considered level.1.EC2 – worked examples 6-49 Fig. turn out: longitudinal tendon: transverse tendon: 19% at anchorage and 14% at pier axis.1 = 319. the maximum value of prestressing losses.75 kN/m Table of Content .6/1.6 kN → qvk. modulus of elasticity ratio. The effects of losses are taken into account with the same procedure used for the prestressing. 6. : σcpo : α = Es/Ec: Ap : Ac : Ic : zcp : stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to self weight and permanent load.38 Relaxation losses in % at 1000 hours for Class 2 σc.3 Traffic Load on Bridges. 6. As a reference.2 Actions The external loads applied on the structure should be evaluated according to the provisions of Eurocode 1. but as actions of opposite sign. 18% at anchorage and 12% at midspan. area of concrete gross section.

SW/0 and SW/2 have been introduced in the FEM analysis considering a spreading ratio of 4:1 in the ballast and of 1:1 in the concrete up to the middle plane of the slab.3 is: qvk = 1.3 kN/m Fig. 6. The load model SW/0 is represented in Fig.39 Adopted load arrangement for LM71 load model The uniformly distributed load qvk according to Eurocode 1.41 Load model SW/2 The previous load model LM71.EC2 – worked examples 6-50 where φdin . Fig.40 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. In the following as left track is denoted the track which has a positive value for the y co-ordinate. therefore subjected to variable load. Fig. while right truck the other one. is evaluated below. Table of Content . 6.1 × 150 × φdin = 174.0 kN/m Fig. 6.6.2 = 102.1 × 80 × φdin → qvk. 6.3 kN/m without any limitation in length.41 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. being the dynamic factor equal to 1. 6.40 Load model SW/0 The load model SW/2 is represented in Fig.39 shows the LM71 arrangement adopted in the calculations.42 shows which elements are involved by spreading effects.1 × 133 × φdin = 170. 6.162. Fig.

8 m and a unit weight of γ = 18 kN/m3). differential temperature variation etc.EC2 – worked examples 6-51 Fig. a limit value of tensile stress in tendon equal to 0.3 17.16 + 0. so that for a width of 9. centrifugal forces. assumed as a load of 1.5 m.04 m 3 3 Several other actions.3 = 27. 6.6×fptk after allowance for losses (t∞). rails. arising from variable loads.25 kN/m2 it turns out: = 25 kN/m3. should be considered in the analysis (as traction and braking.5 = 136. in these calculations only the following actions have been considered (introduced in the mathematical model in different steps): − STEP 1: Self-weight of the structure: adopting a unit weight value of − STEP 2: Prestressing forces at time of tensioning. Table of Content .2 where Lφ is the determinant length defined in the Eurocode 1.73 = 1.8×1. an uniformly distributed load results: gballast = 0.8×9. transverse gradient for drain water. − STEP 5: Others permanent loads composed by.8 kN/m. sleepers and ballast (waterproofing included) evaluated as a cover with a nominal height of 0.33 L1 + L2 + L3 = 1. − STEP 4: Track load comprehensive of. derailment. − STEP 3: Prestressing forces after time-dependent losses: in the calculations.) but.33 + 27.42 Spreading effects on FEM model and loaded elements The dynamic factor φ is calculated by means of the following expression (track with standard maintenance): φ3 = 2.162 L φ − 0.3 as: Lφ = 1. according to the provisions of the applied Railway Code to avoid the risk of brittle failure due to stress corrosion. for the sake of simplicity.75 + 17. wind pressure. has been considered.

875 kN/m.25 = 6.25 kN/m ducts: gducts = 3 kN/m for each. − STEP 6: Variable loads for maximum bending moment on first span (x = 6. 6.00 kN/m for each.43 m).43 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 5 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.25 = 6.5 = 11.25 kN/m noise barriers: gbarriers = 8.44 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 5 − STEP 7: Variable loads for minimum bending moment at pier P1 (x = 18.EC2 – worked examples 6-52 gdrain = 1. for each. ballast retaining walls (with a cross section area of 0.1 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3): greinf beam = 25×0. border curbs (with a cross section area of 0. Fig.25 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3) gwalls = 25×0.18 m). the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: for each. 6.25×9. the applied load is a SW/0 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Table of Content .

6. 6. 6.305 m).EC2 – worked examples 6-53 Fig.47 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 7 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.48 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 7 Table of Content . 6.46 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 6 − STEP 8: Variable loads for max bending moment on second span (x = 32.45 SW/0 arrangement for Load Step 6 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.

0 for favourable effect. Table of Content . ballast excluded. = partial factor of self-weight and permanent loads.15. Q1k = characteristic value of action due to the base variable action. = combination factor of variable loads equal to 0.9 for favourable effect.3 Combinations of Actions The design values for the external actions have been calculated adopting the combinations of loads specified in the applied Code as follow indicated in the symbolic presentation: − Ultimate Limit State ⎧ ⎛ ⎞⎫ Sd = S ⎨γ G1 G1k + γ G 2 G 2 k + γ p Pk + γ Q ⎜ Q1k + ∑ Ψoi Q ik ⎟ ⎬ ⎝ ⎠⎭ i >1 ⎩ − Serviceability Limit State: rare combination ⎧ ⎫ Sd = S ⎨G1k + G 2 k + Pk + Q1k + ∑ Ψoi Q ik ⎬ i >1 ⎩ ⎭ − Serviceability Limit State: quasi-permanent combination ⎧ ⎫ Sd = S ⎨G1k + G 2 k + Pk + ∑ Ψ2 i Q ik ⎬ i >1 ⎩ ⎭ where: G1k = characteristic value of the action due to self-weight and permanent loads.5 for unfavourable effect and 0. equal to 0. ballast excluded.2 for unfavourable effect and 0.0 for favourable effect. = partial factor of variable loads equal to 1.0 for favourable effect. G2k = characteristic value of action due to ballast self-weight.EC2 – worked examples 6-54 6. Qik γ1 γ2 γP γQ Ψ0i Ψ2i = characteristic value action due to of the other independent variable loads.6. Pk = characteristic value of action due to prestress.4 for unfavourable effect and 1. = partial factor of ballast load equal to 1.8. = combination factor of variable loads for quasi-permanent combination at service.8 for unfavourable effect and 1. = partial factor of prestress load equal to 1. equal to 1.

6. no tensile stress should be present in the extreme fibres of the slab and the maximum compressive stress should not exceed the limit value of 0. t = σ x.7 Elem. The angles of principal directions (for which is σxy = 0) are: θ1 = ⎛ 2 σ 23 ⎞ 1 a tan ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ σ 22 − σ 33 ⎠ . t = σ 33. b = where the subscripts t and b indicate respectively top and bottom fibre. 648 93 320 589 h [m] n 22 [kN/m] n 33 [kN/m] n 23 6 75 1 -67 m 22 -225 743 -45 653 m 33 -2176 456 -812 1945 m 23 0 -51 0 20 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 1. one reports the verification related to the four elements showed in fig ii.32 one obtains: Table 6. b = n22 6 m22 + 2 h h n33 6 m33 + 2 h h n23 6 m23 + 2 h h σ xy. b = σ 22. t = σ xy. t / b sin 2 ( θ1 ) + σ 23. . b = σ x. n23 . σ y.5 0. . − crack widths. m22 .8 Table of Content . as subjected to the higher stress level.5 1. t = σ 22. For the sake of simplicity. t / b = σ 22. the value of n22 . t / b cos 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 33. t / b sin ( 2 θ1 ) σ 2. m23 are evaluated so that it results: σ y. m33 . t = n22 6 m22 − 2 h h n33 6 m33 − 2 h h n23 6 m23 − 2 h h . θ2 = θ1 + 90° and the principal stresses result: σ1. The external actions are calculated adopting the rare combination with only the load steps 1 and 2. b = σ 23. b = σ 33. t / b sin 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 23.15.EC2 – worked examples 6-55 6.5 -3091 -7806 -3516 -4280 -13159 -8526 -10418 -10007 Table 6.6 × fck = 21 MPa. n33 . − stress limitation at service. t / b = σ 22. From FEM analysis. t = σ 23. t / b cos 2 (θ1 ) + σ 33. t / b sin ( 2 θ 2 ) Referring to the elements marked in Fig. Verification at tensioning At time of tensioning. − deformation.963 1.4 Verification at Serviceability Limit State The verification at serviceability limit state is relative to the following conditions: − stress limitation at tensioning.

b -2.17 89.99 90.21 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.72 -4.t [°] θ2.23 σ2.83 -9. 6.17 0.t -2.01 -0. under service load conditions.76 -1.62 -6.40 -2.90 -9.58 -1.10 1.97 -5.48 -18.t -2.30 -2.42 σ2.b -2.b 0.98 0.71 -0.85 [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 0.37 -5.01 σ22.22 -4.02 -1. Quasi-Permanent Combination Table 6.97 -11.b -10.85 108.32.46 -13.963 1.36 σ2.b -14.963 1.9 Elem.b -14.t [°] σ1.05 -2.5 1.09 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.48 σ23.14 -2.00 -0. ensuring that.b -2. for the quasi-permanent and the rare combinations. 648 93 320 589 h [m] n 22 [kN/m] n 33 [kN/m] n 23 3 4 7 -55 m 22 -226 577 7 -689 m 33 -615 -133 1279 -1275 m 23 4 -62 -9 -26 σ1.75 -0.78 -11.77 89.58 -8.t -0.98 -10.29 -1.49 -7.t -1.22 -4.00 MPa Compressive stress = 0.86 -4.5 -2420 -6233 -3539 -2736 -10152 -6347 -7855 -7900 Rare Combination Table 6.77 which not exceed the limit one.80 -4.48 σ1.27 -2.00 MPa Applying to the structural FEM model the variable loads and combining them according to the railway code provisions.58 -5.b [°] θ1.46 -1.24 -2.11 -1.41 -5.78 -11.89 -10.25 0. one obtain the maxima stress values at top and bottom fibres that have to be lower than the corresponding limit.15 0. Verification of limit state of stress limitation in concrete The serviceability limit states checked in this section are relative only to stress limitation.11 σ33.65 -2.01 89.t θ1.57 -7.6 × fck = 21.5 1.EC2 – worked examples σ22.10 Elem.91 -2.5 -2238 -6284 -2604 -3791 -10270 -6033 -7479 -8243 Verification of Serviceability Limit State of Cracking The characteristic crack width should be calculated according to the provisions of Model Table of Content .46 -1.00 0.02 89.32 σ1.09 -2.29 88.69 σ2.86 -4.15 -4. 648 93 320 589 h [m] n 22 [kN/m] n 33 [kN/m] n 23 4 50 2 -3 m 22 -236 589 81 -151 m 33 -1576 108 233 -396 m 23 4 -37 4 0 σ1.66 -3.21 -5.48 95.t -1.b [°] 6-56 θ2.t -0.11 σ2.51 -8.66 -3.00 0.b -2.89 σ1.b -8. One reports the results relative to the four elements indicated in Fig. The limit stresses for concrete are: Quasi-permanent combination: Rare combination: Compressive stress = 0.00 0. concrete extreme stresses do not exceed the corresponding limit.31 -2.58 -5.46 -12.59 σ33.59 σ2.5 0.86 σ23.5 0.4 × fck = 14.t -5.t -2.99 0.97 -12.11 -1.

i. reading the maximum deflection in correspondence of the track axis. The limit values δ/L (deflection/span Length) are given by the Eurocode 1. − spalling force at anchorage of prestressing tendon.75 5045 and it results lower than the corresponding limit. able to ensure a ductile behaviour in case of corrosion of prestressing steel.3 as a function of the span length and the train speed. the check shall be performed loading only one track. It can be notice that no further calculation is requested because. so that the elastic value. however. − punching under support plate.EC2 – worked examples 6-57 Code 90. 1 = = L 1600 1455 As a consequence of the transient nature of this event. Having loaded the right track with a LM71 load model plus dynamic allowance. the following limit may be achieved: δ lim 11 . It has be notice. the maximum stress results tensile.0055 1 = = L 27. has to be considered. is relative to the only live load. finally. no specific reinforcement is required and it is sufficient to arrange the minimum amount of reinforcing steel. Deformation Deformation limitation is carried out to control the maximum vertical deflection for passengers comfort. In addition to the analysis of ULS of several shell element under the relevant combination of internal actions. that from stress calculation neither for the quasipermanent combination nor in the rare one. The limit value for maximum vertical deflection is calculated considering a span length of 27. the structure remains entirely compressed. placed in the middle of the of the central span.: − bursting force at anchorage of prestressing tendon. it results: δ 1 = L 1600 that should be multiplied by a factor 1. the elastic deflection.1 for continuous structures. calculated by the FEM analysis. 6. Table of Content .e. the obtained δ/L value is: δ effective 0.75 m (central span) and a train speed over 280 km/h.15.5 Verification of Ultimate Limit State Verification at ULS should regard the structure as a whole and its component parts. analysing the resistance of the critical regions. in this example some case of detailing are investigated. calculated by the FEM model. Therefore. according to the provisions of the Code. due to prestressing effect.

and having set a minimum amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the bottom and top layer of As.6 cm2/m placed at 0.963 1.x ( n 33 ) [kN/m] n Sd.3 of MC 90 and ρ = ρx cos2ϕ o + ρ y sin 2ϕ o .11 Elem.5 0. 649 Internal actions at ULS in a shell elements Let us consider in this section only four elements on the whole (see Fig. ξ (100 ρ fck ) 13 d where vRd1 is specified in chapter 6. 6. If the is not satisfied. it is possible to calculate the principal shear vo2 = vx2 + vy2 .5 1.y ( m 22 ) -239 499 38 -1950 m Sd.32). 6. h [m] n Sd. on the principal shear direction ϕo (such that tan ϕ 0 = v y v x ).5 -1779 -5746 -2130 -3865 -9096 -4610 -5922 -7748 5 -63 10 -54 -6 89 20 -1124 -5 -150 47 -1095 As first step.xy ( m 23 ) -14 -75 -13 -41 v Sd.x ( v 12 ) [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 648 93 320 589 1.y = 22. The internal actions in a shell element at ULS are sketched in Fig. one may design the inner layer checking if specific shear reinforcement is required or not. Table 6.xy ( n 23 ) [kN/m] m Sd. specific shear reinforcement shall be arranged (vertical stirrups) and diagonal compressive forces in concrete shall be checked.12 Table of Content .x = As.x ( m 33 ) 470 -671 3241 -4274 m Sd. In fact.07 m from the external face.49): Table 6.49.y ( v 13 ) [kN/m] v Sd. The external actions are derived from FEM model using the load step for trains which leads to the maximum values and combining the results according to the relevant combination formula. and to check that it turn out: v0 < vRd1 = 012 .EC2 – worked examples 6-58 Slab ultimate limit state Verification at ULS has been performed adopting the sandwich model for shell elements. Fig. According to CEB Bulletin 223.6.4. turns out (on brackets the notation of Fig. the following table may be calculated for the elements considered.y ( n 22 ) [kN/m] n Sd.2. For the investigated elements.

9 805. i = n xy ⎞ z − yi m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ where terms on brackets have be summed if shear reinforcement is required. 6.5 with variation of slab components due to vx and vy (i.56 26.56 3509 13860 763.EC2 – worked examples Elem.0 0.0 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [cm /m ] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1. i = n x ⎞ z − yi m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.50 Internal forces in the different layers n Sdx .14 m so that.i 2 ⎞ z − yi m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .0 0.0 n xyc 0.0 0.00158 23.07 = 0. The outer layers should be designed supposing an initial thickness for both layers not lesser than twice the concrete cover evaluated at the centroid of reinforcement.43 51. nxc .43 1.76 0. 648 93 320 589 d [m] 6-59 ρo [-] ϕo [°] vo 7 51 v Rd1 417 327 417 417 θ [°] F Scw - F Rcw - As/s2 2 2 n xc 0. internal lever arm z and in plane actions may be evaluated for the outer layers of each element referring to Fig. nyc and nxyc ) only for element number 589.e.0 0.0 0.6 784.s = n xy ⎞ z − ys m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .0 0.56 14.18 0. One assumes: ts = ti = 2×0. In the design Table of Content .s 2 ⎞ z − ys m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.43 1.00158 26.893 -30.50 and by means of the following equations: Fig.s = n x ⎞ z − ys m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdx .14 0.0 n yc 0.00158 1569 26.00253 174 45.0 0. 6.77 0.56 26.

7 0. one obtains: Table 6. the reinforcement areas may be calculated as: A sx = nRdx f yd .7 -6252.6 726.i n Sdx.1 -5344.360 307.680 1.220 0.140 0.220 0.3 13. if both the nRdx and nRdy are negative it is possible to omit the reinforcement in both the directions but.680 0.140 1.14 Table of Content . in this case the verification is performed along the principal compression direction in the concrete subjected to biaxial compression and the checking equation is: σc t = n Sdx + n Sdy 2 + (n Sdx − n Sdy 4 ) 2 + v2 Sd ≤ f cd1 t For the considered elements.7 -3120.140 0. A sy = nRdy f yd If concrete strength requirement is not satisfied.680 0.1 -4202.412 0.2 14.8 59.5 1.9 0.4 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1. It can be notice that if nRdx or nRdy value are negative.140 1.680 0.823 -3479.360 -1093. For the chosen elements it turns out: Table 6.s [kN/m] n Sdx.360 -713.140 0. so that a value of 45° for θ angle may be adopted.13 Elem.963 0.5 1.7 -4.8 -1037.5 0.i -7.683 0. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy. an increase layer thickness shall be provided until verification is met.680 1.s n Sdy.680 1.0 32. in this case new values for the layer action having changed z value. if result satisfied.EC2 – worked examples 6-60 procedure is convenient to reach the minimum amount of reinforcement.9 At this stage each layer may be designed by applying the following equations (θ = 45°): σc t = v Sd ≤ fcd 2 t sin θ cos θ safety verification on concrete side required resistance along x direction required resistance along y direction nRdx = nSdx + vSd cot θ nRdy = nSdy + v Sd cot θ from which.i vSd.140 0.3 -2266.140 1.8 -2560.6 -1489.2 0. a compression force is present along that direction and no reinforcement is required.220 0.0 -1065.3 787.s vSd.412 0.5 -122.3 -577.5 -4893.140 0.

1 Asy 2 Asx 0.0 18.8 0.1 -17. minima values should be adopted for Asx and Asy if no reinforcement areas are required. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.EC2 – worked examples Top Layer Design Elem.0 -22.0 0.1 -17.758 -3588.230 -716.0 0.0 0.51: Table of Content .0 38.1 -17.4 -45.8 -129.6 -5040.i n Sdx.1 -17.15 Elem.1 -17.4 0.5 1.8 -3144.0 0.8 f cd1/2 -17. an increasing of layer thickness is required and new values of plate actions are obtained: Table 6.680 1.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.6 -6.0 0.9 -16.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -35.8 14.215 708.387 0.140 0.3 -17.1 -950.0 -4054.0 It can be notice that verification for concrete in compression is not satisfied for any layers except for element 589 top layer and element 320 bottom layer.1 -1062.1 -12.s [kN/m] n Sdx.0 Asy 2 σc -16.5 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.963 0.6 0.0 Of course.9 0.630 1.16 Top Layer Design Elem.7 -2962.4 -7.190 0.9 -38.4 794.580 0.6 -153.s n Sdy.0 0.0 34.1 -12.6 f cd1/2 -17.i -8.372 0.0 25.8 -5.553 0.5 -2157.7 870.i vSd. so.535 1.07 m from the external surface of the slab in an eccentric position with respect to middle plane of the layer. Thus.0 0.020 0.240 0.1 -17.0 0.5 -7090.680 0. the Asx and Asy value are required at the centroid of the layer.5 1. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] 6-61 Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.5 0.0 Asy 2 σc -30.0 720. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.0 0.1 -17.3 0.0 0.0 0.8 -16.3 0.8 -5768.2 0.0 0.1 -17.2 -11.0 0.930 0.5 66.0 0. the amount of reinforcement provided has to be changed to restore equilibrium conditions.960 0.0 0.0 -11.1 -17.0 0.220 0.s vSd.0 0.300 0.0 0.140 1.340 0.1 -17.430 0.0 0.5 -1465.600 0.3 16.0 0.0 -24.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -16. For element 589.0 0.0 which lead to the following values: Table 6.8 -16. 6. This variation may be assessed with the aid of the mechanism pictured in Fig.7 0. whereas they are arranged at 0.260 -1179.

EC2 – worked examples 6-62 Fig.0 0.2 -956.i ns For the investigated elements. Table of Content . For the sake of simplicity.6 0.y [kN/m] n s. only the longitudinal direction of prestressing tendon is considered with respect to the vertical plane. i ⎜ i − bi′⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝2 ⎝ 2 ns = z ni = nSd. to control the structural behaviour and for a best fitted reinforcement layout.5 -1070.3 -159.8 -2287.6 -3274.6 -1399.0 The previous procedure should be repeated for all the elements of the structural model finding the amount of reinforcement to provide in the slab.51 Shell element equilibrium in one direction with two reinforcement layers only The new forces acting on the reinforcements become: t ⎞ ⎞ ⎛t ⎛ nSd .0 0. evaluating the height of the prism so that his centroid results coincident with the centroid of prestressing tendons.s + nSd.0 0.0 34.0 0.0 0.17 Forces referred to tension steel level Elem.3 0. 6. s ⎜ h − s − bi′⎟ + nSd .1 -2242.0 38.x [kN/m] Asx [cm /m] 2 Asx [cm2/m] -702. Table 6.8 -4063.0 0.5 -3522.0 0.3 1664.3 -6370.0 -1163. 648 93 320 589 n s.y [kN/m] Top layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 Bottom layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 n i.0 0.0 0. the following areas have been detected.0 0.0 0.5 -5026.8 1503. to summarise the results in a visual map.0 0.x [kN/m] n i.0 -5752. it is useful. Verification to Bursting Force For the calculation of the bursting force the symmetric prism analogy is used. but transverse force due to bursting effect should be also calculated in the horizontal plane and for transverse prestressing too.

115 .52. is: lbs = hbs = 1.300 m distance between the centroid of tendons above section A-A to the centroid of the prism.5 ( n1 + n 2 ) t 2 − n1 t1 γ 1 FSd = 852. and the most unfavourable situation occurs when a single tendon is tensioned. 6.43 m. considering the lower level of tendon (first tensioned) the height of the prism results: hbs = 2×0. distance between the centroid of concrete stress block above section A-A to the centroid of the prism.52 Geometric dimension for bursting calculation Checking situation is represented in Fig. Table of Content .075 m t2 = 0.2 m and his length. for end anchored tendon. 6.6 = 1. corresponding to the transverse spacing of longitudinal lower tendons. The bursting force follows from the moment equilibrium along section A-A: Nbs = 0. The design force per tendon has been evaluated by means of the following expression: FSd = f ptk 1800 Asp = (139 × 19) × 10 −3 = 4134 kN 115 .EC2 – worked examples 6-63 Fig.2 m while the width follows from the possible enlargement of the anchor plate that may be assumed equal to 0.6 kN zbs where: t1 = 0.

supplementary partial safety factor against overstressing by overpumping.40 m to 1.e.35 × 6 ⎞ ⎧ ⎪ ⎪−15.43 × 1.43 × 1.e. respectively: considering the anchor plate as rigid a value of 0. As.35 m. bs 19.50 2 ⎠ ⎪ σ bott om ⎪ ⎩ +2. The length of the prism for end anchored tendon. 20 0 .4 − s×s ( ) b × lbs 3 that may be provided with ties having diameter of 22 mm and spacing both transversally and longitudinally of 250 mm (see Fig. Considering an eccentricity for upper prestressing tendon of 0.50 m has to be verified for one tendon tensioning.1 numbers of tendons above and below section A-A.5 may be assumed. Thus.50 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-64 n1 . in fact φ22/25×25 corresponds to 60. the extreme stresses at the end of prism length are calculated by means of the beam theory. spalling effects arise if upper tendon are tensioned firstly (the eccentricity leads to tension stresses).38 MPa F ∓ = = − ⎜ ⎟ ⎬ ⎨ Sd ⎝ 0. 53 Bursting reinforcement arrangement Verification to spalling force The spalling force may be calculated with the equivalent prism analogy. n2 γ1 =1.61 cm2 Bursting force shall be resisted by an area of reinforcement steel of: distributed within lbs/3 to lbs .(i. only the longitudinal direction is considered. a section with a breadth of 0.0 cm2/m2 2 0 .43 1 .61 = = = 57.50 m.43 m and a height of 1.bs = Nbs / fyd = 19. 53).20 m) from the anchor plate. for a prestressing force FSd = 4134. Thus the effective area on a meter length. i. Fig. furthermore.428 m from slab bottom fibre (see Fig 54) and the moment for equilibrium turns out: Table of Content . is equal to the overall height of the section. As for bursting verification.0 kN they result (negative if compressive): σ top ⎫ ⎛ 1 0.82 cm2/m2 .56 MPa ⎭ The section along which no shear force results. bs A s. is placed at 0. lsl = 1. may be found by the following: A s. from 0.

Table of Content .031 cm2 placed parallel to the end face in its close vicinity. the amount of reinforcement is: As = Nsl / fyd = 1.43 m.214 2 × 0.81 kN Disregarding any concrete tensile resistance. 54 Calculation scheme for spalling Assuming zsl = 0. the maximum spalling force turns out: Nsl = Msl / zsl = 44.5× lsl and bsl = 0.43 × 10 3 = 33.EC2 – worked examples 6-65 M sl = 2 σ bott om × 0.61 kNm 3 Fig.

EC2 – worked examples 6-66 Table of Content .

96 ⋅ 10 mm . keep the section to the ultimate tension state under load. fyk = 450 MPa. β = 1 The boundary conditions from the first exercise set the neutral axis on the border of the bottom section. d’ = 50 mm.65 mm. that.96 ⋅ 106 Table of content . N. with the boundary conditions σc ( y = h) = 0. e) N = N0 = -800 kN. S* yn = −88.1. c 2 ck σ c ( y = 0) = k 1fck b) σ ( y = d) = k f s 3 sk Then.1 Evaluation of service stresses [EC2 clause 7. assuming k2 = 0.5m. Fig. calculate the couples M. αe = 15. 7. N associated to the three paths d) M/N = -0. calculation of service stresses.45.EC2 – worked examples 7-1 SECTION 7. f) M = M0 = 400 kNm. Finally. The following data are given: fck =30 MPa. linearly changing M N. a) σ ( y = 0) = k f . can be written as N( −600) = −0. evaluate the materials strains from the stresses c) N0 = -800 kN. we have d = 550 mm. 7.1. For this value it results 400 ⋅ 600 12 + 400 ⋅ 600 ⋅ ( 300 ) + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡ 50 2 + 550 2 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ + 300 e= 2 −400 ⋅ 600 2 + 15 ⋅ 1884( −600) 2 3 6 3 and then e =-120.45 ⋅ 30 −88. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 7. Considering Fig.1. Rectangular section. M0 = 400 kNm.2] Evaluate the normal compressive force and of the associated bending moment in the section of Figure 7. or M. The second condition in the first exercise. respectively with constant normal force or constant bending. that is yn = h. h = 600 mm As = 6 ⋅ 314= 1884 mm2.

the stress is N= 1. the ultimate tension state corresponds to the maximal tension admitted for concrete. the tensional state change proportionally and we can state N M 0.48 kN M = (-0.7 N = -0.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.7/3-300)+0.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.59σs d − yn 550 − 235.4 kNm.3) ⋅ 15 = 251.48·103 = .096 M0 =438. N0 M 0 σc Once the concrete ultimate compressive limit state is reached.07MPa 272. If we consider to change M.16⋅(-120. S* yn = −13263 ⋅ 10 mm and then the tensional state is σc = − 800 ⋅ 103 ( −272.8 ⋅ 450 1+ 15 ⋅ 0.80 kN.3 mm.65) ⋅10-3 = 241. M=N⋅e=-2001.3) ⋅ 15 = −201.49 kNm. The tension stress postulated by the second exercise gives the following expression for the neutral axis yn = 1+ d k 3f yk α e k 2fck = 550 = 235.096 .59) ⋅250) ⋅10-6 = 457.42MPa −13.7/2+0.59) ⋅10-3 = -570.42 ⋅ (50 − 272.457.16kN.71mm 0.3 Because the condition e = -500 mm implies that the neutral axis position is lower than the one previously evaluated assuming the maximal stresses for both materials.3 16.7/2⋅(235.7 = σs = −0.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.6 ⋅ 30 and the compressed steel tension and the stress components are ' σs = σs d '− y n 50 − 235.6fck = = = 1.801.263 ⋅ 106 σs = ' σs = 16.3) = −16.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.18MPa 272.5·106/570. M = 1.EC2 – worked examples 7-2 and then N=-2001.5 kNm e = .42 ⋅ (550 − 272. Table of Content .95 mm Considering the third exercise 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 400 −3 3 + y n = −200 e=− ⋅ 10 = −500 mm and 400 2 800 − y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 this equation is iteratively solved: 3 3 yn = 272.096N0 = -876. N keeping constant the eccentricity.

6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 295.2mm 800 ⋅ 103 Keeping constant the bending moment (M = M0).6 ⋅ 30 800 ⋅ 103 Solving with respect to yn 2 yn + 60y n − 84795 = 0 y n = −30.6fck S* yn and then − 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 −y n = 0.51 (550 − 262.EC2 – worked examples 7-3 Working with constant normal force (N = N0) the ultimate limit state for the concrete tension leads to N0 ( − y n ) = −0.6 ⋅ fck 0.25 + 30.57MPa 262.6fck ⋅ S* yn − M0( yn ) h + yn = * 0.69 + 218.6fck S* yn and I* yn S * yn and then e= M0 M 0 (y n ) = N 0.69MPa 262.56 ⋅ 10 e== −553.51mm (50 − 262.51) ⋅ 15 = −218. the limit state condition for the concrete stress is N( − y n ) = −0.51 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.56kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 6 442.51) σs = 0.57) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 442.6 ⋅ fck ⋅ S yn 2 As M0 400 ⋅ 106 = = 22.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ and then 400 ⋅ 262.22 ⋅ 106 mm 3 0.252 + 84795 = 262.51 ⎛ 262.22 ⋅ 106 ⋅ y n ⎣ ⎦ 3 + y n = 300 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] − 2 and iteratively solving Table of Content .6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (295.6 ⋅ 30 the previous numeric form becomes 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ − 22.51 ' σs = 0.

82 MPa 395 (550 − 395) σs = 0.2 reports the results obtained in the evaluation in terms of forces and stresses.67 kN 2 ⎣ ⎦ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎛ 395 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.45) and the other cases b) d) e) f) (k1=0. 7.95 + 235.EC2 – worked examples 7-4 y n = 395 mm (50 − 395) ⋅ 15 = −235.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎡ ⎤ N = ⎢ −0.82) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 400.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 105.95 + 235.65) respectively reach the tension ultimate states under load associated to non linear viscosity phenomena and minimal tension in the presence of particular combinations.95 MPa 395 ' σs = 0. 2B Table of Content .34 kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ e=-240 mm Figure 7. the tension ultimate state under load for tied steel is got just in the case b).2. As a remark. Fig. just in the case c) the concrete tension limit state under load is not reached while in the case a)(k1=0.82)⎥ = −1666.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (105. Results for different limit distributions of stresses.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ + 1884 ⋅ (105. On the other hand.

3.4494 .4494 ⎣ 4 ⎦ Table of Content .6945 − 2(1 − 0.1 6 6 7 β = 1 − αs − αf = 0.25·108 mm3. and then ξ = 809/1800 = 0.65 ⋅ 3.925·106 mm2 . Consider the following data: fck = 45 MPa.8 MPa. k =0. Wi = 7.65 (hw > 1m) The given statements imply: α s = 2 5 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 . r2 = I/A =39.8/ 200 = 0.eff = 3. 7. It results also 1 − αs − αf = 0. σs = 200 MPa.82·1010 mm4.4860 > ξ 2 and for the web ⎡ 3 0.35·104 mm2 Fig.2 Design of minimum reinforcement [EC2 clause 7.6945 0 ρs.01235 Case a) The application of cracking moment is associated to the neutral axis position yn = yG.4 ⎢1 − (1 − 0. I = 71.2] Let’s consider the section in Figure 7. Box .1667 − 0.4494 ) = 0.01235 ⋅ 0. Evaluate the minimum reinforcement into the bottom slab in the following cases: •Application of the first cracking moment Mcr •Application of an axial compressive force N = -6000 kN.3.min = 0.section.4494 ) ⎤ ρs. fct. yG =809 mm.1667 − 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-5 EXAMPLE 7. design of minimum reinforcement.3 with the following geometry: A = 1.00208 ⎥ 1 − 0.1 3 8 8 α f = 3 0 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 .min = 0. applied in the point P at 250 mm from the bottom border of the corresponding cracking moment.

Referring to the bottom slab we get 1 − 9 8 αf = 0.01235 ⋅ 0.812 > ξ and it follows: ρs.min = 0. We use (5+5)φ12 mm equivalent to 1130 mm2.eff ⎥ Wi Wi ⎠ ⎣ A⎝ ⎦ and then: ⎡ 6000 ⋅ 103 ⎛ 741 ⋅ 1.1667 = 0.4494) − 0.min = 0.00208 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 1123 mm 2 this reinforcement has to be put in the web tied area with height over the bottom slab a = 1800 – 809 – 300 = 691 mm.4.825 ⋅ 106 ⎞ ⎤ −6 8 M cr = ⎢ 1+ ⎟ + 3.8 ⎥ 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-6 A s.min = 0.00943 1 − 0.4 Fig.4494 A s. 7. case (a). Minimum reinforcement.00943 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 4243mm 2 We use (14+14)φ14 mm equivalent to 4312 mm2.25 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 = 9585 kNm 6 ⎜ 8 7.25 ⋅ 10 ⎠ ⎣ 1. with eccentricity eN=1800809-250 = 741 mm derives from the relation ⎡ N⎛ ⎤ A ⎞ M cr = ⎢ − ⎜ 1 + e N ⎟ + fct . 45 2(1 − 0.825 ⋅ 10 ⎝ ⎦ the eccentricity of the normal force in the presence of Mcr is then: e = −9585 ⋅ 10 3 6000 + 741 = −856 mm and the neutral axis position results from the relation Table of Content . Case b) The cracking moment associated to the axial force N = -6000 kN. The reinforcement scheme is report in Figure 7.

7050) ⎤ ρs.7050) ⎣ ⎦ A s. The bars have to be located in the tied part of the web for an extension a = 1800-1269-300 = 231 mm over the bottom slab In the bottom slab we have: 1 − 9 8 αf = 0. 3B Table of Content .705) − 0.5 Fig. case (b). ξ = 0.1667 = 0. The reinforcement scheme is reported in Figure 7. 45 2(1 − 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-7 yn = yG − r2 39.7050 e 856 Considering the web.35 ⋅ 104 = 809 + = 1269 mm .min = 0.7050 ) = 0.8(1 − 0.5. 7.705 A s.min = 0.00046 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 248 mm 2 We use 4 φ10 equivalent to 314 mm2.00797 1 − 0. Minimum reinforcement. with h = 1.6945 − 2(1 − 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.00797 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 3586 mm 2 We use (12+12)φ14 mm equivalent to 3692 mm2.1667 − 0.1667 − 0.812 > ξ and it results ρs.8 we deduce: h* ⎡ 0.min = 0.min = 0.01235 ⋅ 0.00046 3 ⋅ 1.01235 ⋅ 0.

0113 s And the equation for the neutral axis yn is −400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡ ⎣548 − y n + 0.167. As an example let’s consider the section in Figure 7.3 Evaluation of crack amplitude [EC2 clause 7. c=40mm. As’=452mm2 (4φ12).EC2 – worked examples 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.3) 1− ξ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ = min ⎢ 2. 7.eff (7. h=600mm. fct.2a) (7.167 ( 46 − y n ) ⎤ ⎦=0 2 and then Table of Content . . fck=30MPa. b=400mm. ρ =2712/(400 ⋅ 600)=0. the (7.5) with improved bound reinforcement (k1=0.2) we get wk = σs Es ⎡ σs. 3 2⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Assuming the prescribed values k3=3. d’=46.9MPa Referring to a short time action (kt=0.17 σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎣ ⎤ λ⎥ ⎦ (7.6. cracks amplitude evaluation assuming αe =15.8). δ=548/600=0. It results then β=452/2712=0.4] The crack width can be written as: wk = with σs ⎡ σs.3.5 (1 − δ ) .4.4) The (7. k4=0.6).4 ⋅ c + 0. As=2712mm2 (6φ24).1) σs.0mm.cr = k t ⋅ fct .eff=fctm=2.425 and considering the bending case (k2=0. Reinforced concrete section. d=548mm.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢k 3 ⋅ c + k 1k 2 k 4 λ ⎥ Es ⎣ σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎦ ρs ⎞ λ⎛ ⎜ 1 + αe ⎟ ρs ⎝ λ⎠ (7.913.0767. M=300kNm.4) can be immediately used as verification formula.6 Fig. δ’=460/600=0.

2012 ⎠ 234 ⎡ 57.08MPa 0.5(1-0.7 + 118.167 ( 46 − 237.2175.913)=0.EC2 – worked examples 2 yn + 237.17 5 ⎢ ⎥ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎣ 234 ⎦ ⎣ 0.8mm .8 = = 0. Then λ=0.184mm ⋅ ⎢3.96 ⋅ 109 = 234MPa and we deduce the λ value to be adopted is the lowest between 2.3963 h 600 I* yn = 400 = 5.96 ⋅ 109 mm 4 237.08 ⎤ ⎡ 24 ⎤ wk = 1− 0.2012 ⎥ = 0.5. The adopted statements lead to σs.0113 ⎦ 4B Table of Content .2012 ⎛ 0.cr = 0.3963)/3=0.6 ⋅ 2.2012.8 )2 + 0. (1-0. 0.8 )2 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 106 ⋅ ( 548 − 237.8 ) / 5. The second order moment results ξ= y n 237.0113 ⎝ 0.2012.72 + 113026 = 237.9 0.4y n − 113026 = 0 7-9 y n = −118.0113 ⎞ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⎟ = 57.4 ⋅ 40 + 0.83 + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡ ( 548 − 237.

stated b. h.5) and with its substitution in the (7. after some calculations we deduce p= w0 k 3. and fixed M.4] 7. Design formulas derivation for the cracking limit state [EC2 clause 7. b. d.4 ⋅ c + 0.9) (7.4.4) to use it as a design formula. where w = w k .8) 2 2 ( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) α e ν ( δ − ξ ) − 2ξ 3 p (7. d’.17 φ⋅λ ρs + (7.4). In particular.EC2 – worked examples 7-10 EXAMPLE 7.11) Es w k setting w 0k = k f t ctm (7.4 ⋅ c ⋅ξ2 + 0.11).5) (7.34αe ⋅φ⋅λ ⎡ δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎤ ξ2 ⎣ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎣ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ αeν ( δ−ξ) ⎡ ⎤ 3ξ2 2ξ3 ⎢ ⎥ × + 2 2 ⎢⎡ ' 1 δ+βδ − +β ξ ⎡ ⎤ ⎤ ( ) ⎦ ⎣( δ−ξ) +β( δ '−ξ) ⎦ ⎥ ⎣⎣ ⎦ Table of Content .4.1 Exact method 8B It is interesting to develop the (7.12) Combining (7.8) and (7. The adimensional calculus leads to 1 − ξ2 − α e ⋅ρs (1 + β ) ξ + α e ⋅ρs ( δ + β ⋅ δ ' ) = 0 2 σs = α e ν ( δ − ξ ) fctm k t 2 2 ⎤ + ξ3 ⎤ δ − ξ + β δ − ξ 2 ⎡3n ⋅ρs ⎡ ' ( ) ( ) ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (7.6) we get ρs = ξ2 2α e ⎡ ⎣ − (1 + β ) ξ + δ + βδ ' ⎤ ⎦ = 3ξ2 p δ + βδ '− (1 + β ) ξ (7.6) setting ν= M = M0 cr M b ⋅ h2 k t fctm 6 (7.7) Deducing ρs from (7.10) with p=σs/(ktfctm) λ +n ρs From (7. the (7. we want to deduce the metal reinforcement amount As and its design tension σs in order to have a crack amplitude wk lower than the fixed value w k .9) is 2 ⎡ ⎤ 2αe ⋅λ w0 k ⋅ξ ' 1 = + δ+βδ − +β ξ +α ⎡ ⎤ ( ) ⎢ ⎥× e ⎦ 3.

the solution for (7.7) and the maximal diameter derives from (7. . In this case. for example coincident with the permissible one. aimed to the determination of the reinforcement amount and its tension corresponding to fixed crack amplitude values and stress level. An alternative procedure.185ν ν u1 = c φ u2 = w 0k φ (7.15) wk = σs Es ⎡ λ ⎛ α e ⋅ρs ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ φ⋅λ ⎞ ⎟ ⎜1+ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 3. using the (7. and together with the (7. leads to the desred values ρs e σs. . it is possible to set the tensional level σs.9.4u1 ν ν * − 0.5(1-δ) and then re-evaluating ξ. if we set the value of σs.18) with respect to φ leads to the relation Table of Content .243 and assuming by definition ν* = ν ν = δ⋅λ 1.11) (7. it is necessary to set in the (7.17 ⎢1 − λ ⎠⎦ ⎝ ρs ⎠ ⎣ ρs ⋅ p ⎝ (7.EC2 – worked examples 7-11 (7.14) 7.16) after some algebra has the form p2 + 5 ⋅ ν * ⎡3.15) and (7.16) aiming to a further simplification of the problem.185ν/(pδ) the (7.9d=M and then ρs=0. we have σsAs0. In this case too. allows the determination of the neutral axis position and then.67) is easy to solve. Alternatively. requires to set before the value of the bars diameter φ.5 practically impossible for bending problems. being the value λ =0. ρs from (7.11).8).4) written for w = w k immediately gives (7.9).88ρs w ok ⎤ − 2c ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ (p − α e )ρs − λ ⎦ (7. the evaluation of the reinforcement tension and its amount. as the parameter p is defined.2 Approximated method The application of the procedure discussed above is quite laborious as it requires to iteratively solve the (7.17) the (7.4. let’s state δ=0.13) λ = 2. which assumes the form: φmax = 5B ρs λ ⎡ 5.9d.18 1− 1− 0.4c + 0. In this way. numerically solved. If it is not the case. consist in the statement that the lever arm h0 is constant and independent from ξ and equivalent to 0.11) solved with respect to φ.13) the (7.13).13). The procedure. easier to be applied. the neutral axis is obtained from (7. λ = 0. and to evaluate the corresponding reinforcement amount ρs and the maximal bars diameter.18) the (11.20 ⎢ ⎣ αe ⎤ p − ν * [17α e ⋅ u1 + 5u 2 ] = 0 ν⎥ ⎦ (7.

6B Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 7-12 φmax ⎡ 17c( νp − α e ν * ) − 5ν * w ok ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = * αe ν ν p − p2 (7.19) that defines the maximal bars diameter.. which. associated to the reinforcement amount given by the (7. allows to satisfy the cracking ultimate state corresponding to a fixed value of the steel tension.15).

p(1) = 156.62 ⋅ 0. h=500mm.965 + 18400. w k = 0. w k = 0. Fig. reinforcement design for the cracking ultimate state.92 + 5 ⋅ 1246 ⋅ k w ] = 0 9.77 = 0. fck=33MPa.74 + 57067 k w Using the previous relation.3 mm .15=7.75 = 290 MPa kw = 2/3. 156.6.2 mm .30mm the maximal amplitude. Then in a general form w 0k = 0.01375·500·1000=6875 mm2 ρs ( 2 3) = 0. Reinforced concrete Section.16 max Defined w k = 0. 2/3. Assuming b=1000mm.185 ⋅ 7.30mm.15kNm ν*=7.7.18/7.77 0.77 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ and then p 2 + 235.6 ⋅ 3.93 p − 4485 − 57067 k w = 0 and then p ( k w ) = −117.185 ⋅ 7. σs (1) = 0.77 δ=(500-63)/500=0. 1/3.5002/6). together with the (7. 7. It results fctm=0.92 ⋅ p − 9.1) u1=50/26=1. design the section to have a crack amplitude w k = 0.086 u2 = 32404 ⋅ k w = 1246 ⋅ k w 26 7. w k = 0.874 w k = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-13 EXAMPLE 7. M=600kNm.01049·500·1000=5245 mm2 ρs (1) = 0.10). in the three cases under examination we can max set w k = w k ⋅ k w where kw = 1.20 ⋅ 15 ⎤ ⎡ − p 2 + 5 ⋅ 9.20mm. c=50mm. in the three cases here considered kw = 1. 7.4] Let’s use the described procedure to the section in Figure 7.75 As (1) = 0.086MPa ν=600/77.332/3=3.16 ⋅ ⎢ 3.92 M0cr=0.62 As (2/3) = 0. 119. φ=26mm.10-6=77.086 · 156. p (2/3) = 119.10mm .16 ⋅ [17 ⋅ 15 ⋅ 1.77/(1-1.6 · 3.7.3.77)=9.4 ⋅ 1.01049 .15) and (7.77 = 0.086.5 Application of the approximated method [EC2 clause 7.75 ⋅ 0.874 Table of Content .(1000.16 7.874 (see ex.01375 .3 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 105 ⋅ k w = 32404 ⋅ k w 0.3.

93 2 + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − 195.3y n − 69614 = 0 y n = −79.EC2 – worked examples 7-14 σs (2/3) = 0. and 26 mm diameter bars are used.02179 .77 = 0.48 ⋅ 0. Table of Content .02179·500·1000=10895 mm2 ρs (1 3) = 0.1 mm σs = 140 MPa Fig.7. 75.086 · 75.8.48 As (1/3) = 0. ξ = 0.01062 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 yn + 159.1 mm .874 σs (1/3) = 0.185 ⋅ 7. p (1/3) = 75.9 = 304 MPa 7.3 mm σs= 290 MPa kw = 2/3 w k = 0. The following results are obtained: kw = 1.6·3.13 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 195.6 · 3.9 ) = 7.086·119.13 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 kw = 1 w k = 0. the metal areas are overestimated.62=221 Mpa kw = 1/3.3918 I∗ yn = 1000 ⋅ 195.2 mm σs= 221 MPa kw = 1/3 w k = 0. Let’s verify the adopted design method in order to evaluated its precision. 7.9 mm .65 + 79. Designed sections. w k = 0.48 ≅ 140 MPa The three sections are reported in Figure 7.652 + 69614 = 195. ρs = 5310/(500·1000) = 0.

3918) / 3 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-15 The lowest value for λ has to be chosen between λ = 2.11⎞ ⎛ 0.cr = 0.6 ⋅ 3.874) = 0.213 mm 238 ⎠ ⎝ 0.06 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 247.11 MPa 0.01062 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 63.1 mm .17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ = 0.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.086 ⋅ wk = 238 2 ⋅ 105 0.2027 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⋅ ⎜ 3. ρs = 111.2 2 + 143704 = 247. ξ = 0.1903 ⎛ 0.494 I∗ yn = 1000 ⋅ 247.1903 σs.6 = 238 MPa 8.4292 I∗ yn = 1000 ⋅ 214.086 ⋅ wk = λ = (1 – 0.1903 ⎞ ⎛ 53.06 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 λ = (1 – 0.cr = 0.52 + 90498 = 214.6 ) = 8.51 / (50 · 100) = 0.31 ⎞ ⎛ ⋅⎜1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.03 / (50 · 100) = 0. Then σs.1) = 1.0138 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 53.2027 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.494) / 3 = 0.0223 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ ⎡ ⎣9558 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) + 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − y n ) ⎤ ⎦=0 2 2 yn + 334.0138 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 yn + 207.01062 ⎟ 2 ⋅10 ⎝ ⎠ kw = 2/3 . ρs = 69.13 2 2 + 15 ⋅ 9558 ⋅ ( 437 − 247.41 ⋅ 109 0.4292) / 3 = 0.1 = 160 MPa 1.6 ⋅ 3.4 ⋅50 + 0.6 mm .0138 ⎝ 0.01062 ⎝ 0.306 mm ⎟ 5 ⎜ 304 ⎠ ⎝ 0.1687 Table of Content . ξ = 0.1 y n − 90498 = 0 y n = −103.5 + 103.2 + 167.41 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 437 − 214.2027 ⎛ 0.1903 ⎠ λ = (1 – 0.315.1) + 15 ⋅ 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − 247.2027 ⎠ 304 ⎛ 63.63 2 + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − 214.31 MPa 0.5 y n − 143704 = 0 y n = −167.0138 ⎠ ⎝ kw = 1/3.5 (1 – 0.

1687 ⎠ 160 ⎛ 41.811 0.2.70 – 19.99) / (18·160 + 3·160·13.0223 ⎠ The obtained values are in good agreement with those evaluated within the design.70 – 21.4 ⋅ 50 + 0. The values from the verification are slightly larger because of the fact that in the considered section the internal drive lever arm is lower than the approximated value 0.2 6903 221 0.3 and Figure 7. in the three case we have kw = 1 kw = 2/3 kw = 1/3 h0/d = (43.70 ≅ 0.1 and 7.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.78 ⎞ ⎛ 0. being h0/d the adimensional lever arm in units of effective height d.14). The obtained results are reported in the Tables 7.792/18. Stating a suitable precision for the approximated method.70 = 0.cr = 0.836 0. those values are evaluated using the (7.EC2 – worked examples 7-16 σs.46/3) / 43.0223 ⎝ 0.78 MPa 0. Table 7. Table 7.16) (7.9d assumed in the approximated design procedure.1.99) + + 2/3·24.9 0.213 0. Table of Content .59/3) / 43. The reinforcement increase the lever arm of the section reducing the difference between the approximated values and those coming from the verification. The approximated method previously discussed can be successfully applied in the design of the ultimate crack state.9. Approximated method.0223 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 41.1687 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.8 Let’s remark that the presence of a compressed reinforcement is highly recommended to make ductile the section in the ultimate limit state. 7.79/18.71] / 43.1687 ⎛ 0.9.99 + 3·160·13.9 As (mm ) 11151 6903 5310 2 wk (mm) 0.70 = 0.836 h0/d = [(18·160·18. In fact. wk (mm) As (mm ) σs (MPa) 0.086 ⋅ wk = 0.120 0. Comparison between the exact and approximated methods.6 ⋅ 3.10 report numerical values and graphs for the maximal diameter and the required reinforcement expressed as a function of fixed values for σs.3 5310 190 2 h0/d 0. Table 7.9 0.85 h0/d = (43.1 11151 140 0.2 and they are shown in Figure 7.12 mm 5 ⎜ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎝ 160 ⎠ ⎝ 0.85 Fig. Exact method.306 σs (MPa) 160 238 304 h0/d 0.

Approximated method – Determination of maximum diameter.EC2 – worked examples 7-17 Table 7.10.3 mm (C) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 280 30 5430 290 26 5310 309 20 4910 325 16 4672 355 10 4282 Fig.2 mm (B) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 214 30 7001 221 26 6903 233 20 6508 243 16 6245 261 10 5816 wk = 0.3. Diagrams for Maximal diameter (φmax) – Metal area (As ) – Steel tension (σs). 7.1 mm (A) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 137 30 11111 140 26 11151 145 20 10486 149 16 10205 156 10 9750 wk = 0. wk = 0. Table of Content .

7. Referring to the stage I.12.11.9 ⋅ 5.05 ⋅ 109 mm 4 12 18.6 In the stage II.13. deformation limit state.6kNm Considering the whole applied load then M max = 40 ⋅ 10 8 = 500kNm 2 λ= M max 500 = =3 M cr 166. Fig.8 From Table [3. 7.30 ⋅ 30 and then the cracking moment results 2 3 = 2.12 Fig.8mm 500 ⋅ 7003 2 I = + 500 ⋅ 700 ⋅ 35. and solve the problem firstly in a cumulative way. Assume the following values for the main parameters Fig. As=3164mm2 (7φ24) .6 Verification of limit state of deformation Evaluate the vertical displacement in the mid-spam of the beam in Figure 7. deflected beam.13.11 with constant transversal section represented in Figure 7. 7. as reported in Figure 7.13. fck=30MPa.05 ⋅ 109 Wi* = = 5. g+q=40kN/m. as indicated in Figure 7. A * = 700 ⋅ 500 + 15 ⋅ 3164 = 397460mm 2 * yG = * I ( 700 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 350 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ 650 ) 397460 = 385.9MPa M cr = fctm Wi* = 2.745 ⋅ 107 mm 3 700 − 385.2-EC2] we get fctm = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-18 EXAMPLE 7. g=2q.8 ) = 18. l=10m.8 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 385. Section at stage I.745 ⋅ 107 ⋅ 10 −6 = 166. Transversal section. stating αe = Es/Ec=15. Table of Content .

is given solving the equation 2 4 ( ξ1 − ξ1 )= M cr 1 = M max λ (7.22) Calculating the integrals on the right side of the equation we finally obtain 2 M 4 3 β ⎛ ⎞ ⎡5 ⎤ 4 Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ + ξ1 − ξ1 − 2 ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎥ Ec I I ⎣ 48 3 4λ ⎝2⎠ ⎦ (7. .01 ⋅ 1010 mm 4 I* II = 500 ⋅ 3 2 3 then c=18.1) here expressed as ⎛ Δv ( l 2 ) ⎞ v ( l 2) = vI ( l 2) ⋅ ⎜1 + vI ( l 2) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7.78 Fig.21) where Ec is assumed to be Ec =Es/15 in agreement with the introduced statement for the parameter αe. The evaluation of the middle-spam displacement can be easily obtained using the relation (7. the equation (7.13=1. Section at stage II.14. ξ1 E c I I ⎣ ξ1 M max g ( ξ ) ⎦ ⎝2⎠ ξ= z l (7.23) The abscissa ξ1. that can be expressed for symmetry reason 1 2 ⎡ 1 M M2 f (ξ) ⎤ ⎛ ⎞ Δv ⎜ ⎟ = 2 ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ ∫ 2 f M ( ξ ) g ( ξ ) dξ − ∫ 2 β 2cr M dξ ⎥ .84y n − 123396 = 0 yn 2 y n = −94. g(ξ) = 4(ξ–ξ2).05/10.92 2 + 123396 = 269mm 269 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 269 ) = 1.24) Table of Content .92 + 94. Defining the parameter λ=Mmax/Mcr and considering that fM(ξ) = ξ/2.21) is written as 2 ⎡ 1 M β ⎛ ⎞ Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ ∫ 2 4 ( ξ2 − ξ3 ) dξ − 2 Ec I I ⎣ ξ1 4λ ⎝2⎠ ∫ 1 2 ξ1 dξ ⎤ ⎥ 1− ξ ⎦ (7. 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-19 −500 ⋅ y n 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − y n ) = 0 2 + 189.20) where vI is the displacement calculated in the first step and Δv(l/2) the increase of the displacement itself caused from the cracking. where the cracked part of the beam start.

15.27) If the value of c previously calculated is inserted in the (7. 7.88 of the displacement calculated in the stage II. a concentrated load Q=200kN. for the same Mmax. we obtain the curves reported in Figure 7. producing the same maximal moment in the mid-spam section. Furthermore.29) (7. 12Ec I ∗ I (7. considering that v I = The (7.30) The corresponding curves are reported in Figure 7. In this way. ξ1 .25) λ ⎦ 2⎣ 5 M max 2 48 Ec I ∗ I (7. that is characterized by a parabolic diagram of the bending moments.15. the displacement in case of concentrated load results to be lower because the linear trend of the relative bending moment is associated to a smaller region of the cracking beam with respect to the case of distributed load. it is possible the evaluation the deformation of the whole beam.λ.20) is expressed as 2 ⎡ 48 ⎛ 4 4 3 ⎞ 12 β ⎤⎫ ⎛ ⎞ 5 M max ⎧ − ξ1 ⎟ − v⎜ ⎟ = 1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 + ⎜ ξ1 ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎬ ⎣ ⎦ ∗ ⎨ 2 ⎥ 5 ⎝ 3 ⎠ 5 λ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 Ec I I ⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭ (7.28) in this case v 1 = M max ξ1=1/(2λ). varying z .15.93 and 0.27) stating β=1 and letting λ changing in the range 1≤λ≤∞. The result. The same problems can be solved in a generalized form evaluating numerically the displacement following the procedure expressed in (11.51). Diagrams for v/v1 . that show as the increase of the ratio λ means a decrease for ξ1 and the increase of v(l/2) as a consequence of a larger cracked part of the beam. In the same way. . leads to the following expression for the section displacement 2 ⎛ ⎞ M l v ⎜ ⎟ = max * ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12Ec I I 3β ⎡ ⎡ ⎤⎤ 3 ⎢1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 − 8ξ1 − λ 2 (1 − 2ξ1 ) ⎥ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎦ ⎣ 2 (7.26) Finally. We observe as the displacements in the two cases of distributed and concentrated load are respectively 0. for a distributed load Table of Content Fig.EC2 – worked examples 7-20 and then ξ1 = 1⎡ λ −1⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ (7.

71mm ⎝2⎠ a) Concentrated load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 1 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 17.16. as obtained comparing the values in Figure 7.29) and using the results in Figure 11.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1. is about 4%. displacement increase caused by the cracking (b) And total deformation (c).65 ⋅ 21.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.56 ⋅ 17.EC2 – worked examples 7-21 and for λ=3. Remark as the committed error in the evaluation of the mid-spam deflection. 7. where graphs refer to a 20 folders division for the cracking part of the beam.64mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18. Table of Content .16.25. Deformation in the stage I (a). we have for the mid-spam displacement: •Distributed load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 5 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 21.31 = 27.64 = 35.15 and Figure 7.00mm ⎝2⎠ Fig.6. introducing the numerical values in the (7. In particular. is reported in Figure 7.26) (7.31mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.

EC2 – worked examples 7-22 Table of Content .

flck = value of the characteristic cylindric compressive strength in MPa.1 and 11.95. for corresponding density class in kg/m3. can be taken equal to: .2] The criteria for design of the characteristic tensile strength (fractile 5% and 95%) and of the intersecting compressive elastic module for light concrete are shown below.for concrete of class > LC 50/55 Where: flctm = 0.0.12 ln[1+(flcm/10)] η1 η1 = 0.60 ρ/2200 ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density. in accordance with the instructions of paragraphs 11. Tensile strength The average value of simple (axial) tensile strength. which can be used as an indicative value for design of the deformability of structural members. for two different types of light concretes and for the corresponding ordinary concretes belonging to the same strength classes.7 flctm fractile 95% : flctk. 2 Table of Content .3 [MPa] •flcm = value of the cylindric average compressive strength in MPa.3 flctm Intersecting compressive elastic module In lack of direct experimentation.2 of Eurocode 2.EC2 – worked examples 11-1 SECTION 11.05 e 0.3.for concrete of class ≤ LC 50/55 . the intersecting compressive elastic module at 28 days. flcm = value of the average cylindric compressive strength in MPa.3.The results of calculation of the two above-mentioned mechanical features are shown and compared in the following table. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 11. can be estimated by the expression: ⎡f ⎤ E lcm = 22000 ⎢ lcm ⎥ ηE ⎣ 10 ⎦ where: 0. ⎛ ρ ⎞ • ηE = ⎜ ⎟ .3.95 = 1.05 = 0. in lack of direct experimentation. corresponding to fractiles 0.3.1 [EC2 Clause 11. The characteristic values of simple tensile strength.0.40+0.1 – 11.30 flck2/3 η1 flctm = 2. ⎝ 2200 ⎠ ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density. can be taken equal to: fractile 5% : flctk. for the corresponding density class expressed in kg/m3.

563 -2.0.7 3.2 3.959 -0.9 3.05 [MPa] fctk.1 5.5 4.4 5.0.2 19168 34077 Concrete type 2 Light Ordinary 60 2050 2400 68 0.7 33950 39100 11-2 flck [MPa] ρ [kg/m3] flcm [MPa] η1 ηE fctm [MPa] fctk.850 -0.2 1.868 -4.2 4.95 [MPa] Elcm [MPa] Table of Content .1 Concrete type 1 Light Ordinary 35 1650 2400 43 0.4 2.9 2.EC2 – worked examples Table 11.

to which corresponds a steel section As equal to As = T/fyd = 3030 mm2. The compressive stress in it is constant and it is equal to flcd = 0. The distance of the neutral axis from the compressed upper edge is therefore x = 28. ρ = 1650 kg/m3).75‰. which implies the simultaneous achievement of maximum contraction side concrete and of the strain corresponding to the design yield stress of the tensioned reinforcement steel. Fig. is able to withstand when the reinforcement steel achieves the design elastic limit. the second remaining area is the one where compression on concrete linearly decreases from the value flcd to zero in correspondence of the neutral axis. The section in question is shown in Fig.365 = 432. made of type 1 lightweight concrete. for fyk= 450 MPa. The design strain corresponding to steel yielding. The arm of internal forces is h’ = d – 10. like in the previous example.3.85 flck/γc = 19.4 – 11. h=50cm and d=47cm.2 [EC2 Clause 11.75‰ and εlcu3 = 3.15 x Es) = 450/(1.6 – 11.1 together with the strain diagram related to the failure mode recalled. from which the value of the moment resistance of the section can eventually be calculated as MRd = 1185 x 0. In case one chooses.EC2 – worked examples 11-3 EXAMPLE 11. Table of Content .1 Deformation and tension diagram of r.5 cm = 36. to use the bilinear diagram to calculate the compressive strength on concrete.96‰.11.98‰. is εyd = fyd /(1. section.8 MPa.3 cm.5 kNm. Two areas can be distinguished in the compressed zone: the first one is comprised between the upper edge and the chord placed at the level where the contraction is εlc3 = 1.15 x 200000) = 1.1 – 11.5 cm from the compressed end of the section and is equal to C = 1185 kN.3. For the condition of equilibrium the resultant of compressions C is equal to the resultant of tractions T. The resultant of compression forces is placed at a distance of around 10.3.6] The maximum moment that the reinforced concrete section of given dimensions.5 cm. 11. described in the previous example. build up with lightweight concrete (flck = 35 MPa.5 – 11. the limits of strain by compression have values εlc3 = 1. for collapse condition in which maximum resisting bending moment is reached with reinforcement at elastic design limit.c. The dimensions of the section are: b=30 cm.5η1 = 2.

EC2 – worked examples 11-4 Table of Content .

- Hajde Da Se Pravimo Englezi
- budzangasana
- V. Mitrović - LIBERALNA EUGENIKA
- D. Polšek - Eugenika, Sudbina Odabranih
- J. Bryant - Ethical Issues In Genetic Modification
- A. Krstic - ETIKI ASPEKTI GENETSKE KONSULTACIJE
- Izvodjacki Detalji Biber Krunsko
- Volja za moć - Fridrih Niče
- stropne ploce
- Pravilnik o Vodenju Gradj Dnevnika
- Architectural Structures - Schierle
- Drvene konstrukcije i skele - D. Stojic
- Astrologija III, Analiziranje horoskopa - M. Marc, Dz. Mekevers
- Juraj Justinijanovic-Nacrtna geometrija za 1. razred gradjevinskih skola
- Opis Prethodne Inkarnacije
- Inzenjerska Seizmologija/skripta - B. Glavatovic
- VS Slim Box Gueltig
- VS System
- VS Systeme 3D
- Build 02
- Build 01
- Tower 5
- Blaschke Robert - Astrologija Odnosa
- Newton Michael - Putovanje dusa
- Mesecevi Cvorovi Po Znacima (Sensa 37)

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulEurocode design

Eurocode design

- Design Aids EuroCode
- Eurocode2_Commentary2008
- How to Design Concrete Structures Using Eurocode 2
- Ccip Worked Examples Ec2
- Concise Eurocode 2
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- Ccip Concise Ec2
- Concrete Design using eurocode 2
- Eurocode 3 Actions
- Structural Elements Design Manual-Working With Eurocodes 2009
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- Worked Examples for the Design of Concrete Structures to Eurocode 2
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- Worked Example to Eurocode 2 Vol. 1
- eurocode_7_geotechnical_limit_analysis
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- EuroCode_4
- Guide Ec2 En
- BCA - Worked Examples Design of Concrete Building
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- ecoli
- EN1992_3_Jones
- Structrual Concrete Design to Eurocode 2 University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- Concise Eurocode 2
- Composite beam design to Eurocode 4 Hüseyin Gören
- Steel Structures, Practical Design Studies 2nd - T. J. MacGinley
- REAM Guidelines for Road Drainage Design - Volume 4
- Worked Examples Ec2 Def080723